Jaw fracture surgery: which approach is safer?
NCT ID NCT07403708
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study compares two surgical techniques for fixing a broken lower jaw joint (subcondylar fracture). Twenty patients will be randomly assigned to receive either the transmasseteric anteroparotid (TMAP) approach or the retromandibular transparotid (TP) approach. The goal is to see which method causes fewer facial nerve injuries, less pain, and better scar satisfaction over a 3-month follow-up.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- surgical procedure
- What this could lead to
- If one approach proves safer, it could become the preferred method for fixing this type of jaw fracture, reducing nerve damage and improving recovery.
- What could go wrong
- This is a very small trial (20 patients) comparing two surgical techniques. Results may not apply to all patients, and both procedures carry risks like nerve injury or infection.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
20 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Jan 2024
- Finished
-
Dec 2025
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
20 to 50 years
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Accepted
You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Patients suffering from displaced extracapsular mandibular subcondylar fracture indicated for open reduction including: Difficulty of obtaining adequate occlusion by closed method. Radiological signs of the following: 1. Deviation of the he fragments from the axis of the ascending ramus in medial or lateral direction more than 10°. (28) 2. Shortening of the ascending ramus ≥ 2 mm measured from the roof of glenoid fossa to the inferior border of the ascending ramus of the mandible. 3. Dislocation of the condyle from the glenoid fossa. Exclusion Criteria: * Patients who were not able to follow the information given or to make a decision themselves due to mental or other problems. 2. Patient with undisplaced condylar fractures that doesn't cause malocclusion or loss of facial heightening and can be treated conservatively.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Condylar fractures are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Alexandria university
Alexandria, Egypt
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.