Coronal Incision: An Approach to Facial Fractures

Surya Rao Rao Venkata Mahipathy, Alagar Raja Durairaj, Narayanamurthy Sundaramurthy, Shobhan Nandy

Abstract


Background:  The coronal incision with its various modifications provides the most versatile approach to various areas in the cranio-maxillofacial region coupled with excellent exposure. The aesthetic advantage of a hidden scar in the hairline, accounts for its continued popularity. In maxillofacial it can be used for fractures in the frontal bone, nasal bone and extensive fractures involving zygomatic arch and complex

Methods: In this clinical and observational study, we operated 5 patients with complex cranio-maxillofacial injuries involving frontal bone, zygomatic arch and zygomatic complex, nasal bone and supra-orbital region. All the five cases were trauma cases between ages of 20 to 60 years with no facial nerve injury per-operatively. These cases for followed for post-operative complications namely sensory and motor nerve deficits, haematoma, wound dehiscence and ptosis

Result: Two patients each had sensory and motor nerve deficits and one patient had minimal wound dehiscence, all settled conservatively

Conclusion:  The incision provides excellent access, has reduced complications and produces an acceptable scar. This incision is advised in treating complex cranio-facial trauma, tumors and le-fort esthetic surgeries. 

 

DOI: 10.21276/AABS.1430


Keywords


Coronal, Aesthetic, Facial Fractures, Versatile

Full Text:

PDF

References


Rajmohan, Susmitha, David Tauro, Bhupesh Bagulkar, and Anuj Vyas. 2015. “Coronal/Hemicoronal Approach – A Gateway to Craniomaxillofacial Region.” Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research : JCDR 9 (8): PC01-PC05. doi:10.7860/JCDR/2015/14797.6296.

Abubaker, A. O., G. Sotereanos, and G. T. Patterson. 1990. “Use of the Coronal Surgical Incision for Reconstruction of Severe Craniomaxillofacial Injuries.” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: Official Journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 48 (6): 579–86.

Shepherd, D. E., R. P. Ward-Booth, and K. F. Moos. 1985. “The Morbidity of Bicoronal Flaps in Maxillofacial Surgery.” The British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 23 (1): 1–8.

Dunaway, D. J., and J. A. Trott. 1996. “Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Condylar Fractures via an Extended Bicoronal Approach with a Masseteric Myotomy.” British Journal of Plastic Surgery 49 (2): 79–84.

Dayan, S. H., S. W. Perkins, A. J. Vartanian, and I. M. Wiesman. 2001. “The Forehead Lift: Endoscopic versus Coronal Approaches.” Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 25 (1): 35–39.

Zhuang, Q.-W., X. P. Zhang, X. Wang, J. Zhang, Z.-P. Li, Y.-M. Si, and J. Meng. 2015. “Coronal Approach to Zygomaticomaxillary Complex Fractures.” European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 19 (5): 703–11.

Zhang, Qing-Bin, Yao-Jun Dong, Zu-Bing Li, and Ji-Hong Zhao. 2006. “Coronal Incision for Treating Zygomatic Complex Fractures.” Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery: Official Publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery 34 (3): 182–85. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2005.09.004.

Frodel, J. L., and L. J. Marentette. 1993. “The Coronal Approach. Anatomic and Technical Considerations and Morbidity.” Archives of Otolaryngology--Head & Neck Surgery 119 (2): 201–207; discussion 140.

Polley, J. W., and M. Cohen. 1992. “The Retroauricular Coronal Incision.” Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery 26 (1): 79–81.

Munro, I. R., and J. A. Fearon. 1994. “The Coronal Incision Revisited.” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 93 (1): 185–87.

Atlan, G., P. Jammet, C. F. Schmitt-Bernard, L. Dupoirieux, and F. Souyris. 1994. “Bicoronal Incision for Nasal Bone Grafting.” International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 23 (1): 2–5.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.