Resorbable Versus Titanium Rigid Fixation for Pediatric Mandibular Fractures: A Systematic Review, Institutional Experience and Comparative Analysis

Abstract

Study Design: Pediatric mandible fractures mandate special consideration because of unerupted teeth, mixed dentition, facial growth and the inability to tolerate maxillomandibular fixation. No consensus exists as to whether resorbable or titanium plating systems are superior with regards to clinical outcomes. Objective: This study aims to systematically review and compare the outcomes of both material types in the treatment of pediatric mandible fractures. Methods: After PROSPERO registration, studies from 1990-2020 publishing on outcomes of ORIF of pediatric mandible fractures were systematically reviewed according to PRISMA guidelines. An additional retrospective review was conducted at a pediatric level 1 trauma center. Results: 1,144 patients met inclusion criteria (30.5% resorbable vs. 69.5% titanium). Total complication rate was 13%, and 10% required a second, unplanned operation. Complication rates in the titanium and resorbable groups were not significantly different (14% vs. 10%; P = 0.07), and titanium hardware was more frequently removed on an elective basis (P < 0.001). Condylar/sub-condylar fractures were more often treated with resorbable hardware (P = 0.01); whereas angle fractures were more often treated with titanium hardware (P < 0.001). Within both cohorts, fracture type did not increase the risk of complications, and comparison between groups by anatomic level did not demonstrate any significant difference in complications. Conclusions: Pediatric mandible fractures requiring ORIF are rare, and hardware-specific outcomes data is scarce. This study suggests that titanium and resorbable plating systems are equally safe, but titanium hardware often requires surgical removal. Surgical approach should be tailored by fracture anatomy, age-related concerns and surgeon preference.