Advertisement

Retrospective Analysis of Subtarsal Incision in Maxillofacial Trauma

  • Ravi Kumar Mahajan
  • Kunal GuptaEmail author
  • Krishnan Srinivasan
  • Ankush Tambotra
  • Sardar Mahipal Singh
  • Amreen Kaur
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

Subciliary, subtarsal and infraorbital incisions are the conventional cutaneous approaches to infraorbital rim and floor.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective study was developed with 30 patients reviewed over a period of 12 months.

Result

No cases showed ectropion in minimum 12-month follow-up. Mild scleral show was present in 3 cases. At the end of 12 months, scar was invisible in 25 patients, mild in 4 patients and moderate in 1 patient who developed wound infection.

Conclusion

Subtarsal incision shows good result with very minimal post-operative complications.

Keywords

Subtarsal incision Maxillofacial trauma 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This study was undertaken in conformity with the Declaration of Helsinki.

References

  1. 1.
    Kushner GM (2006) Surgical approaches to the infraorbital rim and orbital floor: the case for the transconjunctival approach. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 64:108–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marzola C (2008) Fundamentos de cirurgia buco maxilo facial, vol 6. Ed. Bigforms, BauruGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Subramanian B (2009) Comparison of various approaches for exposure of infraorbital rim fractures of zygoma. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 8(2):99–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bassichis BA et al (2007) Lower-lid blepharoplasty. Oper Tech Otolaryngol 18:209–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baqain ZH et al (2008) Subtarsal approach for orbital floor repair: a long-term follow-up of 12 cases in a Jordanian Teaching Hospital. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 66:45–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rohrich RJ et al (2003) Subciliary versus subtarsal approaches to orbitozygomatic fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 111:1708–1714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilson S et al (2006) Surgical approaches to the infraorbital rim and orbital floor: the case for the subtarsal approach. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 64:104–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Feldman EM (2011) The subtarsal incision: where should it be placed? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69:2419–2423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sullivan T (1990) Rating the burn scar. J Burn Care Rehabil 11:256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baryza MJ et al (1995) The Vancouver scar scale: an administration tool and its interrater reliability. J Burn Care Rehabil 16:535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Draaijers L et al (1960) The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation. Plast Reconstr Surg 113:2004Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fearmonti R et al (2010) A review of scar scales and scar measuring devices. Eplasty 10:e43PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nedelec B et al (2008) Quantitative measurement of hypertrophic scar: interrater reliability and concurrent validity. J Burn Care Res 29:501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roques C et al (2007) A critical analysis of measurements used to assess and manage scars. Int J Low Extrem Wounds 6:249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Converse JM (1981) A ramdomised comparison of four incision for orbital fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 67:736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ellis E III et al (1985) An analysis of 2,067 cases of zygomatico-orbital fracture. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 43:417–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Werther JR (1998) Cutaneous approaches to the lower lid and orbit. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56:60–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holtman B et al (1981) A randomized comparison of four incisions for orbital fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 67:731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Melo Crosara J et al (2009) Comparison of cutaneous incisions to approach the infraorbital rim and orbital floor. Braz J Oral Sci 8(2):88–91Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bahr W et al (1992) Comparison of transcutaneous incisions used for exposure of the infraorbital rim and orbital floor: a retrospective study. Plast Reconstr Surg 90:585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ridgway EB et al (2009) The incidence of lower eyelid malposition after facial fracture repair: a retrospective study and meta-analysis comparing subtarsal, subciliary, and transconjunctival incisions. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ravi Kumar Mahajan
    • 1
  • Kunal Gupta
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • Krishnan Srinivasan
    • 1
  • Ankush Tambotra
    • 2
  • Sardar Mahipal Singh
    • 1
  • Amreen Kaur
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryAmandeep HospitalAmritsarIndia
  2. 2.Amandeep Hospital and ClinicsAmritsarIndia
  3. 3.Amandeep HospitalAmritsarIndia
  4. 4.Department of Plastic SurgeryAmandeep Hospital and ClinicsAmritsarIndia

Personalised recommendations