Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of two- dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) in the identification and classification of Le Fort type fractures. Methods: Sixty-two patients with d...Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of two- dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) in the identification and classification of Le Fort type fractures. Methods: Sixty-two patients with different types of Le Fort fractures underwent CT scanning and 3D-CT reconstruction. The data were analyzed by multiplanar reconstruction (MPR), surface shaded display (SSD) and volume rendering (VR) respectively. Results: The patients with Le Fort Ⅰ, Le Fort Ⅱ fracture and Le Fort Ⅲ fracture accounted for 16.1%, 14.5% and 12.9% respectively. The compound fractures were the most common type and accounted for 56.5% (n=35, 18 cases with Le FortⅠ+Ⅱ fracture, 10 cases with Le Fort Ⅱ+Ⅲ fracture and 7 cases with Le FortⅠ+ Ⅱ+Ⅲ fracture). Fifty-five cases coexisted with other fractures in maxillofacial region. 2D-CT could be used to define the tiny fractures and the deep-structure fractures more accurately compared with 3D-CT, but the real impression of Le Fort type fractures could not be correctly evaluated on 2D-CT. 3D-CT could clearly demonstrate the whole shape of Le Fort type fractures and identify the classification of Le Fort fractures. Conclusions: 3D-CT is the best imaging method for the diagnosis of Le Fort type fractures and can provide valuable information of space relationship, especially for the design of treatment plan before operation.展开更多
文摘Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of two- dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) in the identification and classification of Le Fort type fractures. Methods: Sixty-two patients with different types of Le Fort fractures underwent CT scanning and 3D-CT reconstruction. The data were analyzed by multiplanar reconstruction (MPR), surface shaded display (SSD) and volume rendering (VR) respectively. Results: The patients with Le Fort Ⅰ, Le Fort Ⅱ fracture and Le Fort Ⅲ fracture accounted for 16.1%, 14.5% and 12.9% respectively. The compound fractures were the most common type and accounted for 56.5% (n=35, 18 cases with Le FortⅠ+Ⅱ fracture, 10 cases with Le Fort Ⅱ+Ⅲ fracture and 7 cases with Le FortⅠ+ Ⅱ+Ⅲ fracture). Fifty-five cases coexisted with other fractures in maxillofacial region. 2D-CT could be used to define the tiny fractures and the deep-structure fractures more accurately compared with 3D-CT, but the real impression of Le Fort type fractures could not be correctly evaluated on 2D-CT. 3D-CT could clearly demonstrate the whole shape of Le Fort type fractures and identify the classification of Le Fort fractures. Conclusions: 3D-CT is the best imaging method for the diagnosis of Le Fort type fractures and can provide valuable information of space relationship, especially for the design of treatment plan before operation.
