Johno Breeze

Management of maxillofacial wounds sustained by British service personnel in Afghanistan

UK service personnel sustaining maxillofacial wounds in Afghanistan are stabilised in a field hospital prior to evacuation for definitive treatment at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine (RCDM). Descriptive injury data were gathered from the Joint Theatre Trauma Registry (JTTR) between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2009 and matched to hospital clinical records. The mean Abbreviated Injury Severity (AIS) scores in service personnel sustaining maxillofacial wounds alone were compared with those with injuries to all body areas. Maxillofacial wounds were present in 21% of British servicemen sustaining battle injuries, but 30% of all evacuations despite the similar mean AIS of each group. This probably reflects the complex care these injuries often require that is not possible in the field. In the field hospital, maxillofacial wounds were predominantly debrided and definitive repair was deferred until evacuated to RCDM. AIS codes are an excellent predictor of mortality from face and eye wounds but they reflect morbidity poorly. The authors propose that instead of a single AIS code, each military face and eye injury should be ascribed a second separate Occulo-Facial Functional and Aesthetic (OFFA) outcome score that more accurately predicts the aesthetic and functional parameters of these wounds.

Personal Armour Used by UK Armed Forces and UK Police Forces

Personal armour is an overarching term used to describe personal protective equipment that is worn or carried by an individual to stop the penetration of projectiles into the human body (Table 6.1). Personal armour is most commonly used by the Armed Forces and the police, but other users include first responders (such as fire and ambulance personnel) and security professionals. The aim of this chapter is to provide information regarding (a) personal armour materials, (b) how personal armour protects the user, (c) the anatomical structures protected by personal armour and (d) the types of personal armour worn by UK Armed Forces and UK Police Forces. Comments are also made regarding likely behind armour injury and removal of armour.

Numbness of the lower lip does not adversely affect quality of life or patients’ satisfaction after mandibular orthognathic surgery

Measures of patient-reported quality of life (QoL) are increasingly being used to tailor services that are funded by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCG) in England. Mandibular osteotomies may result in altered sensation of the lower lip, but we know of limited evidence about the resulting effect on QoL. The modified Bristol orthognathic patient outcomes questionnaire was given to patients who had mandibular osteotomies at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, between March 2006 and April 2016. Questionnaires were collected at the final orthognathic postoperative appointment. The significance of the difference in QoL between those who had altered sensation of the lower lip and those who did not was compared using a two-tailed t test. During this period 170 patients had mandibular orthognathic operations. Completed questionnaires were received from 117 of those patients (69%) during this period, after a follow up of about six months. We found no significant difference between the perceived benefits of treatment between the 41 who had altered sensation and the 74 who did not (p=0.30). Only 5/41 who reported residual numbness six months postoperatively stated that they would not choose to have the same treatment again. In conclusion, orthognathic surgery results in an appreciable improvement in QoL and should continue to be funded by CCG in England. Contrary to the perception of some clinicians, those patients with residual numbness of the lip did not have significantly poorer QoL. Future interpretation of the data will be improved if they are collected both before and after the operation.

Optimising ballistic facial coverage from military fragmenting munitions: a consensus statement

VIRTUS is the first United Kingdom (UK) military personal armour system to provide components that are capable of protecting the whole face from low velocity ballistic projectiles. Protection is modular, using a helmet worn with ballistic eyewear, a visor, and a mandibular guard. When all four components are worn together the face is completely covered, but the heat, discomfort, and weight may not be optimal in all types of combat. We organized a Delphi consensus group analysis with 29 military consultant surgeons from the UK, United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to identify a potential hierarchy of functional facial units in order of importance that require protection. We identified the causes of those facial injuries that are hardest to reconstruct, and the most effective combinations of facial protection. Protection is required from both penetrating projectiles and burns. There was strong consensus that blunt injury to the facial skeleton was currently not a military priority. Functional units that should be prioritised are eyes and eyelids, followed consecutively by the nose, lips, and ears. Twenty-nine respondents felt that the visor was more important than the mandibular guard if only one piece was to be worn. Essential cover of the brain and eyes is achieved from all directions using a combination of helmet and visor. Nasal cover currently requires the mandibular guard unless the visor can be modified to cover it as well. Any such prototype would need extensive ergonomics and assessment of integration, as any changes would have to be acceptable to the people who wear them in the long term.

Contemporary surgical management of hypodontia

Hypodontia is the term most commonly applied to the condition in which teeth congenitally fail to develop. Such cases differ from teeth that have been lost early or that have failed to erupt, although their initial presentation may be similar and therefore not recognised. The range of missing teeth and their physical and psychological results is large, and the difference in complexity in the management of a patient with isolated hypodontia compared with one with oligodontia or anodontia together with skeletal and orthognathic discrepancies should not be underestimated. Surgical interventions primarily involve augmentation of bone before placement of an implant, but may include techniques such as distraction osteogenesis and orthognathic surgery. These patients are best managed by a multidisciplinary team, and in this review our aim has been to describe the role of oral and maxillofacial surgeons within it.

Success rates and complications of autologous onlay bone grafts and sinus lifts in patients with congenital hypodontia and after trauma

Autogenous bone remains the gold standard for augmentation of the alveolar ridge in congenital hypodontia and appreciable post-traumatic deformity. This generally reflects the volume of material required for such defects and the osteogenic potential of the grafts. Morbidity at the donor site and success rates may lead to autogenous grafts being superseded by xenografts or alloplastic materials in the future, but we know of little evidence to confirm this. All patients having augmentation of the alveolar ridge or sinus lift to enable subsequent placement of implants between 01 January 2009 and 31 December 2016 were identified from a prospectively-gathered database held at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham. Morbidity was recorded, with overall success defined as a graft that enabled subsequent placement of an implant. During this period the following grafts: calvarial (n=4), iliac crest (n=4), and ramus (n=149) were recorded, as well as 53 sinus lifts. Sinus lift augmentation with BioOss® had the highest success rate (51/53). Calvarial and iliac crest grafts had higher failure rates (2/4 and 3/4, respectively) than those from the mandibular ramus (6/149, 4%). Fifteen of 149 (10%) ramus grafts resulted in transient anaesthesia of the inferior alveolar nerve but no patients developed any permanent morbidity at the donor or recipient sites. Ramus grafts are a predictable method of bone augmentation with only transient morbidity at the donor site. Higher failure rates for extraoral grafts probably reflect their use in more challenging cases when more bone is required. Bilateral ramus grafts are an alternative to extraoral grafts and may be supplemented by bovine-derived particulate grafts with no appreciable increase in complications.