Sanjay Tota* and Niral Modi

ENT Department, Head and Neck Surgery, M. P. Shah Medical College, G. G. Hospital, Jamnagar, India

*Corresponding Author: Sanjay Tota, ENT Department, Head and Neck Surgery, M. P. Shah Medical College, G. G. Hospital, Jamnagar, India.

Received: July 29, 2021; Published: August 21, 2021

Abstract

Background: This is a study of 60 patients with nasal bone fracture treated at our hospital. They were analyzed for age and sex incidence, side prevalence, presentation and treatment opt ions.

Methods: Through history was taken and examination was done and cases were investigated with CT scan or X-ray and then treated.

Results: Presentation was more in males (73%) than the females (27%). In our study, the most common cause of nasal bone fracture was road traffic accident (59%) and least common was trauma due to assaults. The most common investigation done was nasal bone x-rays (60%). Fracture bone reduction was done under local anesthesia or sedation in 87% of patients and general anesthesia in 13% of patients. Most of the affected patients with nasal bone fracture had lateral impact injury (70%) while others presented with front al impact injury. Closed reduction of nasal bone fracture was done in most patients (77%), while others with linear non displaced nasal bone fracture were placed on medication.

Conclusion: The incidence of nasal bone fractures was found to be more in males due to their involvement in sports and adventures and those in the 11 to 30 year age group. Clinical presentation and x-rays of the nasal bone were found to be useful tools in the management of these fractures. Nasal fractures can be treated with good outcomes in the majority of patients with closed reduction. If proper treatment is not given in timely interval, nasal bone fracture may cause functional and aesthetic deformity.

Keywords: Fracture Nasal Bones; Closed Reduction; Frontal and Lateral Impact Injury

References

1. Murray JAM. “Management of sept al deviation with nasal fractures”. Facial Plastic Surgery 62 (1989): 88-93.
2. Nahum AM. “Biomechanics of maxillofacial trauma”. Clinics in Plastic Surgery 2 (1975): 59-64.
3. Courtney MJ., et al. “Nasal fracture manipulation: a comparative study of local and general anesthesia technique”. Clinical Otolaryngology 28 (2003): 472-475.
4. Han-Kyul Park., et al. “The retrospective study of closed reduction of nasal bone fracture”. Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery6 (2014): 266-272.
5. Small EW. “Survey of maxillofacial fractures”. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 34 (1996): 27-28.
6. Logan M., et al. “The utility of nasal bone radiographs in nasal trauma”. Clinical Radiology 49 (1994): 192.
7. Turvey TA. “Mid- facial fractures: a retrospective analysis of 593 cases”. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 35 (1977): 887-891.
8. Wild DC., et al. “Reduction of nasal fractures under local anesthesia: an acceptable practice Surgeon 1 (2003): 45-47.
9. Khwaj a S., et al. “Nasal fracture reduction; local verses general anesthesia”. Rhinology 45 (2007): 83-88.
10. Cook JA., et al. “A randomized comparison of manipulation of the fractured nose under local and general anesthesia”. Clinical Otolaryngology and Allied Sciences 15 (1990): 343-346.

Citation

Citation: Sanjay Tota and Niral Modi. “Incidence, Evaluation and Management of Nasal Bone Fracture: Study of 60 Cases".Acta Scientific Otolaryngology 3.9 (2021): 49-52.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Sanjay Tota and Niral Modi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.