The Different Surgical Approaches to Maxillofacial Reconstruction after Ballistic Trauma

Abstract

Background: Ballistic trauma to the face is a challenge, combining complex bone injury with severe soft tissue loss. The various surgical methods available are influenced by the extent of injuries. This study compares different operative modalities and their outcomes with different variables, aiming to define the ideal therapeutic approach. Methods: We retrospectively compared reconstructive modalities used to treat facial ballistic trauma cases at Hôtel-Dieu de France Hospital, Beirut, Lebanon, for a 12-year span. Statistical analysis was used to determine correlation between several factors and satisfactory results. Results: Eighteen patients were included, with varying degrees of bone and soft tissue loss. After conservative debridement, fractures were treated by different modalities: open reduction and internal fixation, maxillomandibular fixation, and osteosynthesis with a reconstruction plate. Although primary closure was sufficient in 10 cases, severe loss of tissues was reconstructed with a fibular free flap in five cases, radial free forearm flap in two cases, and free parascapular flap in one case. Two others received an iliac bone graft as secondary reconstruction. The average follow-up was 2.45 years. Most cases achieved good aesthetic and functional results after several secondary operations, with few late complications. Early reconstruction and younger patients were associated with better outcomes. Conclusions: We favor early debridement and reconstruction. Free flaps were ideal for extensive tissue loss. Bone grafting was needed secondarily. A single surgical procedure seldom led to satisfactory functional and aesthetic outcomes, and secondary operations were inevitable.