<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="1.0" article-type="healthcare" lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">IJCRR</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">I Journ Cur Res Re</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>International Journal of Current Research and Review</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">I Journ Cur Res Re</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2231-2196</issn><issn pub-type="opub">0975-5241</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Radiance Research Academy</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">2064</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi"/><article-id pub-id-type="doi-url"/><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>COMPARISION OF LOCKING PLATE AND CONVENTIONAL PLATE IN TREATMENT OF MANDIBULAR FRACTURE&#13;
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Ramesh</surname><given-names>Bindu</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kotrashetti</surname><given-names>S M</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>K</surname><given-names>Umashankar G</given-names></name></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>H</surname><given-names>Ramesh B</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><volume>)</volume><issue/><fpage>179</fpage><lpage>183</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>This article is copyright of Popeye Publishing, 2009</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2009</copyright-year><license license-type="open-access" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><license-p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) Licence. You may share and adapt the material, but must give appropriate credit to the source, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made.</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome and complications between the&#13;
2.0mm locking titanium miniplate and 2.0mm conventional titanium miniplate in the treatment&#13;
of mandibular fractures. 20 cases were selected for the study. 10 cases were treated using&#13;
locking plates and 10 cases were treated using conventional plates. Clinically and radio&#13;
graphically both the groups were followed up for healing and complications. There were a few&#13;
complications in both the groups. There was a case of infection in group treated with 2.0mm&#13;
locking titanium miniplates and a case of malocclusion and a case of mobility in group treated&#13;
with conventional titanium miniplates. Our results show no significant difference in the&#13;
treatment outcome between locking plates and conventional plates.&#13;
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>mandible fracture</kwd><kwd> locking plate</kwd><kwd> infection</kwd><kwd> malocclusion</kwd><kwd> mobility</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></article>
