NCT02283528

A Comparison of Stryker Hybrid Arch Bars

A Comparison of Stryker Hybrid Arch Bars Versus Erich Arch Bars for Maxillomandibular Fixation of Mandibular Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Study

• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 50 (actual)
• Sponsor: Emory University · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Patients who sustain a fracture of the lower jaw are typically treated by wiring the teeth together or using small titanium plates and screws to fix the fracture. With either technique the upper and lower teeth are held together to ensure that the fracture is held in the correct position during healing (for closed reduction) or while the plate and screws are applied (for open reduction). The teeth can be held together using Erich arch bars which are a type of braces that are temporarily wired to the existing teeth. These stay in place for 6 weeks until the fracture has healed even though the patient is able to open his mouth immediately after the surgery is complete. The alternative to the traditional Erich arch bars is a relatively new type of arch bar (Stryker Hybrid) that is screwed to the jaw bone rather than wired to the teeth. The purpose of this study is to compare the two types of arch bars in terms of the speed with which they can be applied as well as any difference in fracture healing

Conditions

• Fracture Mandible

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
DEVICE	Stryker Hybrid	Place Hybrid arch bars
DEVICE	Erich	Control group is Erich arch bars

Timeline

• Start date: 2015-05-01
• Primary completion: 2017-12-21
• Completion: 2017-12-21
• First posted: 2014-11-05
• Last updated: 2019-01-14
• Results posted: 2019-01-14

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United States