These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of computed tomography with conventional radiography for midfacial fractures.
    Author: Tanrikulu R, Erol B.
    Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 May; 30(3):141-6. PubMed ID: 11420625.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of computed tomography (CT) with conventional radiography in midfacial fractures. METHODS: The conventional radiographs (CM) and CT scans of 40 consecutive patients with complex midfacial fractures were assessed independently by two examiners. The number and site of fractures of the orbit, zygoma and maxilla were compared by the Wilcoxon Matched Pairs Signed Rank test. The best method for classification of the fracture was determined. RESULTS: Coronal CT (CCT) proved superior in the diagnosis of orbital fractures (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between any of the imaging methods for fractures of the zygoma. Axial CT (ACT) was the most effective method in imaging of maxillary fractures (ACT-CM; P<0.001, ACT-CCT; P<0.01). CCT was the most useful in classification of orbital and maxillary fracture. CONCLUSION: CCT is superior to CM for the assessment of complex midface fractures
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]