2017-18 HSC Section 4 Green Book

Doerr

predominantly lower level. This does not mean that surgeons should minimize the contributions these retrospective series have made in the un- derstanding of facial fracture management. Despite the methodological faults, these less rigorous studies are, at times, the only research available to answer a clinical question. With the goal of providing the best care to patients, sur- geons have an obligation to attempt randomized trials to investigate important clinical questions. When such trials are impractical, using multi- institutional clinical registries can enhance the understanding of treatment outcomes and help satisfy the goal of using an evidence-based approach to treatment. 1. Andreasen JO, Jensen SS, Schwartz O, et al. A systematic review of prophylactic antibiotics in the surgical treatment of maxillofacial fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:1664–8 . 2. Kyzas PA. Use of antibiotics in the treatment of mandible fractures: a systematic review. J Oral Max- illofac Surg 2011;69:1129–45 . 3. Miles BA, Potter JK, Ellis E. The efficacy of postoper- ative antibiotic regimens in the open treatment of mandibular fractures: a prospective randomized trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:576–82 . 4. Shridharani SM, Berli J, Manson PN, et al. Evidence- based medicine versus experience-based medicine in plastic surgery: The role of postoperative antibi- otics in mandible fractures - a systematic review of the literature and international survey. Ann Plast Surg 2014. [Epub ahead of print] . 5. Knepil GJ, Lakouta RA. Outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics following surgery for zygomatic bone fracture. Journal of Cranio-maxillo-facial Surgery 2010;38:131–3 . 6. Morris LM, Kellman RM. Are prophylactic antibiotics useful in the management of facial fractures? Laryn- goscope 2014;124:1282–4 . 7. Brodie HA. Prophylactic antibiotics for posttraumatic cerebrospinal fluid fistulae. A meta-analysis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;123:749–52 . 8. Villalobos T, Arango C, Kubilis P, et al. Antibiotic pro- phylaxis after basilar skull fractures: a meta-anal- ysis. Clin Infect Dis 1998;27:364–9 . 9. Ratilal BO, Costa J, Sampaio C, et al. Antibiotic pro- phylaxis for preventing meningitis in patients with basilar skull fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(8):CD004884 . 10. Mondin V, Rinaldo A, Ferlito A. Management of nasal bone fractures. Am J Otolaryngol 2005;26: 181–5 . 11. Fernandes SV. Nasal fractures: the taming of the shrewd. Laryngoscope 2004;114:587–92 . REFERENCES

12. Staffel JG. Optimizing treatment of nasal fractures. Laryngoscope 2002;112:1709–19 . 13. Khwaja S, Pahade AV, Luff D, et al. Nasal fracture reduction: local versus general anesthesia. Rhinol- ogy 2007;45:83–8 . 14. Chadha NK, Repanos C, Carswell AJ. Local anaes- thesia for manipulation of nasal fractures: systematic review. J Laryngol Otol 2009;123:830–6 . 15. Atighechi S, Baradaranfar MH, Akbari SA. Reduc- tion of nasal bone fractures: a comparative study of general, local, and topical anesthesia techniques. J Craniofac Surg 2009;20:382–4 . 16. Al-Moraissi EA, Ellis E. Local versus general anes- thesia for the management of nasal bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Max- illofac Surg 2015;73(4):606–15 . 17. Danda AK. Comparison of a single noncompression miniplate versus 2 noncompression miniplates in the treatment of mandibular angle fractures: a prospec- tive, randomized clinical trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:1565–7 . 18. Siddiqui A, Markose G, Moos KF, et al. One mini- plate versus two in the management of mandibular angle fractures: a prospective randomized study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;45:223–5 . 19. Laverick S, Siddappa P, Wong H, et al. Intraoral external oblique ridge compared with transbuccal lateral cortical plate fixation for the treatment of frac- tures of the mandibular angle: prospective rando- mised trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;50:344–9 . 20. Sugar AW, Gibbons AJ, Patton DW, et al. A randomised controlled trial comparing fixation of mandibular angle fractures with a single miniplate placed either transbuccally and intra-orally, or intra-orally alone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 38:241–5 . 21. Adeyemi MF, Adeyemo WL, Ogunlewe MO, et al. Is healing outcome of 2 weeks intermaxillary fixation different from that of 4 to 6 weeks intermaxillary fixa- tion in the treatment of mandibular fractures? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;70:1896–902 . 22. Kaplan BA, Hoard MA, Park SS. Immediate mobili- zation following fixation of mandible fractures: a pro- spective, randomized study. Laryngoscope 2001; 111:1520–4 . 23. Nasser M, Pandis N, Fleming PS, et al. Interventions for the management of mandibular fractures. Co- chrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(7):CD006087 . 24. Dorri M, Nasser M, Oliver R. Resorbable versus tita- nium plates for facial fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(1):CD007158 . 25. Ahmed W, Gulzar S, Bukhari A, et al. Bioresorbable versus titanium plates for mandibular fractures. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2013;23:480–3 . 26. Eckelt U, Schneider M, Erasmus F, et al. Open versus closed treatment of fractures of the mandib- ular condylar process—a prospective randomized

252