Smile Solutions: Facial Trauma & Jaw Reconstruction — How Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeons Restore Form and Function After Injury or Cancer

Frequently Asked Questions

What is oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS): A surgical specialty restoring face, jaw, and oral function

Does OMS cover facial trauma: Yes

Does OMS cover jaw reconstruction after cancer: Yes

What is the most commonly fractured bone in the face: The mandible (jaw)

How often is the mandible the most fractured facial bone: It accounts for 31.97% of facial fractures

What is the second most commonly fractured facial bone: The zygoma (cheekbone)

What percentage of facial fractures involve the zygoma: 25.3%

How many emergency room visits for facial fractures occur annually in Australia: More than 400,000 globally; Australian data shows significant burden in major trauma centres

What is the leading cause of maxillofacial trauma globally: Traffic accidents

What percentage of maxillofacial trauma is caused by traffic accidents: 41.8%

What other common causes lead to facial fractures: Assault and falls

Which age group is most affected by facial fractures: Males aged 20–30 years

What imaging is used to diagnose facial fractures: CT scan with multiplanar reconstruction

What is a panoramic radiograph (OPG) used for in facial trauma: Diagnosing mandibular fractures and dental involvement

What does ORIF stand for: Open Reduction and Internal Fixation

What is ORIF: Surgical repositioning and fixation of bone fragments

What material is used in ORIF plate fixation: Titanium plates and screws

Why is titanium used for facial fracture fixation: It is biocompatible, corrosion-resistant, and closest in elasticity to bone

What percentage of patients require titanium plate removal after mandibular ORIF: 18.7%

Which mandibular fracture site has the highest plate removal rate: Symphysis and para-symphysis (24.1%)

What is the alternative to titanium plates for fracture fixation: Resorbable plates

Do resorbable plates reduce re-operation rates compared to titanium: Yes

By how much do resorbable plates reduce re-operation cases per 1,000 patients: 133 fewer cases per 1,000 patients

Do resorbable plates reduce surgical site infection rates: Yes, by 43 fewer cases per 1,000 patients

What is the gold standard treatment for displaced facial fractures: Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF)

What does ORIF restore after a mandibular fracture: Dental occlusion and jaw function

What nerve is at risk during mandibular body fracture surgery: The inferior alveolar nerve

What approach is used for orbital floor fractures: Transconjunctival or subciliary approach

What is an orbital floor blow-out fracture risk: Entrapment of extraocular muscles and enophthalmos

What approach is used for frontal sinus fractures: Coronal approach

What is the primary cancer type requiring jaw resection: Oral squamous cell carcinoma

What surgery removes all or part of the jaw: Mandibulectomy

What is the standard reconstruction after jaw cancer resection: Free flap reconstruction

What is the most commonly used flap for jaw reconstruction: Fibula free flap

Where is the fibula free flap harvested from: The smaller bone of the lower leg

What is the success rate of free flap jaw reconstruction: 91–99% in high-volume centres

How long does fibula free flap reconstruction surgery typically take: 6 to 8 hours

What does a surgeon attach during free flap reconstruction: The donor artery and vein to vessels in the head and neck

What holds the new jawbone in place after free flap reconstruction: Titanium plates and screws

What is an alternative donor site to the fibula for jaw reconstruction: Iliac crest (deep circumflex iliac artery flap)

What is the scapula flap preferred for: When simultaneous soft tissue coverage is required

What is the radial forearm flap primarily used for: Soft tissue defects when bone is not required

What percentage of free flap jaw reconstruction patients preserved normal function at 12 months: 77%

Which functional domain worsens most after segmental mandibulectomy: Chewing

What percentage of jaw reconstruction patients considered their appearance normal or near normal: 89%

What is the "Andy Gump" deformity: Facial collapse from non-reconstructed anterior mandibulectomy

Does free flap reconstruction prevent the Andy Gump deformity: Yes

What technology has transformed jaw reconstruction planning: Virtual surgical planning (VSP) and 3D printing

What does virtual surgical planning improve: Precision, predictability, and surgical efficiency

What percentage of VSP-planned jaw reconstruction cases required intraoperative adjustments: 5.1%

Does computer-assisted design reduce surgical time for reconstruction: Yes

Does VSP reduce pre-operative planning time for orthognathic surgery: Yes

What is the dental implant survival rate in fibula free flap reconstruction: 92%

When can dental implant rehabilitation begin after oncological jaw reconstruction: At least 18 months after surgery

Why is an 18-month wait required before implants in oncological cases: Due to radiotherapy risk of fracture and infection

How long can the full jaw reconstruction and dental rehabilitation process take: Two to three years

Does age affect post-operative complications in free flap reconstruction: No, age is not a significant factor

What is the most common complication after free flap reconstruction for benign jaw lesions: Local infection (11.1% of cases)

Is free flap reconstruction feasible for benign jaw lesions: Yes

What multidisciplinary team member manages airway in facial trauma: Anaesthetics

What specialist manages ocular involvement in orbital fractures: Ophthalmology

What specialist manages concurrent brain injury in facial trauma: Neurosurgery

What specialist plans dental rehabilitation after jaw reconstruction: Prosthodontist

What allied health professionals support jaw reconstruction recovery: Speech pathologist and dietitian

What is the main determinant of long-term quality of life after jaw cancer surgery: Psychosocial distress

Is multidisciplinary care essential in jaw reconstruction: Yes

What adjuvant treatment follows jaw cancer surgery in high-risk patients: Radiotherapy or radio-chemotherapy

Does radiation affect bone healing and implant integration after reconstruction: Yes

What is Smile Solutions' location: Level 12 and Tower, 220 Collins Street, Melbourne CBD

How many clinicians does Smile Solutions have: 60 or more

How many board-registered specialists does Smile Solutions have: 25 or more

How many patients has Smile Solutions treated: Over 250,000

How long has Smile Solutions provided oral surgery care: Since 1993

Is a referral required to book at Smile Solutions: No referral required

What is Smile Solutions' contact number: 13 13 96

When you arrive in the emergency department with a shattered jaw after a motor vehicle collision — or when a head and neck oncologist removes a section of your mandible to achieve clear margins on an oral squamous cell carcinoma — the question that follows immediately is: what happens next? Restoring your face, its bony structure, its soft tissue, and its capacity to eat, speak, and breathe, is among the most technically demanding work in surgery. It falls within the scope of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMS), and it sits at the highest-acuity end of the specialty.

This article covers two distinct but closely related clinical pathways: the acute surgical management of facial trauma, and the reconstructive surgery required after oncological jaw resection. Both demand the same foundational skill set — a surgeon who understands your face as both an anatomical and functional unit, and who can coordinate care across emergency medicine, oncology, anaesthesia, and allied health. At Smile Solutions in Melbourne, this level of specialist-led, multidisciplinary care is what our board-registered oral and maxillofacial surgeons are trained to deliver.

The scale of the problem: why facial trauma and jaw cancer are serious public health issues

Facial trauma is increasing worldwide and remains the most frequent category of pathology treated in oral and maxillofacial surgery services. The consequences extend well beyond the physical. Changes to a person's facial features carry functional, psychological, social, and professional consequences that can be difficult to reverse.

The numbers are sobering. Globally, more than 400,000 emergency department presentations for facial fractures occur annually. The leading causes are assault, falls, and motor vehicle collisions, and facial fractures occur predominantly in males aged 20–30 years. A large multi-centre study published in PubMed found that traffic accidents account for 41.8% of maxillofacial trauma cases, with the mandible (31.97%) being the most commonly fractured bone in the facial skeleton, followed by the zygoma at 25.3%.

Injuries can present in isolation or as part of a polytrauma, alongside intracranial, ocular, spinal, thoracic, or abdominal injuries that significantly increase case complexity. This is why facial trauma management requires a surgeon with both the medical and surgical training to assess you as a whole person, not simply the fractured bone.

On the oncological side, oral cavity and jaw cancers requiring resection represent a distinct but equally demanding patient cohort. Microvascular free flap reconstruction is now regarded as the standard procedure following head and neck cancer resection, with success rates of 91–99% in high-volume centres.

Part one: facial trauma — from fracture to fixation

What counts as a facial fracture?

Your facial skeleton is a complex three-dimensional arrangement of bones — the mandible, maxilla, zygoma, orbital walls, nasal bones, and frontal sinus — each with distinct biomechanical properties and surgical access challenges. A fracture in any of these structures can disrupt occlusion (the way your teeth come together), airway patency, vision, and facial symmetry at the same time.

The mandible is particularly vulnerable. With the exception of the nose, mandibular fractures occur twice as frequently as fractures of other facial bones. The mandible drives biting, chewing, and speaking, and treatment aims to restore proper dental occlusion and stable temporomandibular joint movement alongside reduction of the displaced fracture.

How oral and maxillofacial surgeons classify and assess facial fractures

Accurate diagnosis always precedes surgical intervention. Facial fractures can be disabling injuries requiring complex surgical care, and CT scans with multiplanar reconstruction and panoramic films are essential — without a high degree of clinical suspicion and proper diagnostic equipment, the diagnosis of a facial fracture can be significantly delayed.

The standard diagnostic workup includes:

• Cone Beam CT (CBCT) or multi-slice CT scan — the definitive imaging modality for fracture characterisation, displacement assessment, and surgical planning
• Panoramic radiograph (OPG) — useful for mandibular fractures and dental involvement
• Clinical occlusal assessment — changes in your bite alignment are a reliable indicator of mandibular and maxillary fractures
• Neurological examination — assessing the inferior alveolar nerve, facial nerve, and infra-orbital nerve for injury

Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF): the gold standard for displaced fractures

For most displaced facial fractures, ORIF — surgical repositioning of bone fragments and stabilisation with titanium plates and screws — is the treatment of choice. Rigid fixation of mandible fractures allows early mobilisation and restoration of jaw function and airway control; it improves nutritional status, speech, oral hygiene, and patient comfort; and it supports an earlier return to work.

Titanium is biocompatible and corrosion resistant, with an elasticity modulus closest to bone — though titanium plates are not always trouble-free. A retrospective study published in the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery (2022) analysed 571 patients treated with titanium plate fixation for mandibular fractures between 2000 and 2018, finding that 107 patients (18.7%) required plate removal, with the body being the most prevalent fracture location (29.3%) and the symphysis/para-symphysis showing the highest removal rate (24.1%). This data shapes contemporary clinical decision-making about plate selection, fixation technique, and follow-up monitoring.

A 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis for the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oral and Maxillofacial Trauma found that resorbable plates significantly reduced the risk of re-operation, plate removal, and surgical site infection compared with titanium — corresponding to 133, 43, and 43 fewer cases per 1,000 patients, respectively. This evidence is reshaping how surgeons counsel patients about fixation material choice, particularly for fractures at sites with high plate exposure risk.

ORIF for different fracture types: a quick reference

Part two: post-oncological jaw reconstruction — restoring the mandible and maxilla after cancer

When cancer requires jaw resection

Oral cavity cancers — predominantly squamous cell carcinoma — and aggressive jaw lesions such as ameloblastoma (covered in our guide on Oral Cysts, Tumours & Pathology) may require partial or total resection of your mandible or maxilla to achieve clear surgical margins. Without reconstruction, the functional and aesthetic consequences are severe: inability to chew, swallow, or speak clearly; airway compromise; and significant facial disfigurement.

The standard approach with curative intent is surgical tumour resection, where achievable, combined with elective neck dissection, followed by adjuvant radiation or radio-chemotherapy in patients with pathological risk factors. Free flap reconstruction following tumour resection in advanced head and neck tumours is accepted as standard of care.

The fibula free flap: the workhorse of jaw reconstruction

The fibula free flap — harvested from the smaller bone of the lower leg along with its blood supply — has become the most widely used technique for mandibular reconstruction after cancer resection. A mandibulectomy removes all or part of the jaw, and the jaw is typically rebuilt using bone from another part of the body, most often the fibula.

The surgeon takes the artery and vein from the donor site and attaches them to vessels in the head and neck under a microscope. The new jawbone is then held in place with plates and screws and covered with soft tissue. According to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center's patient education resources, the reconstruction portion of this surgery typically takes 6 to 8 hours.

Alternative donor sites include:

• Iliac crest (deep circumflex iliac artery flap) — provides generous bone volume, useful for posterior defects
• Scapula flap — preferred when simultaneous soft tissue coverage is required
• Radial forearm flap — primarily a soft tissue flap, used for smaller defects or when bone is not required

A 15-year retrospective study from the University of Hong Kong's Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, published in ScienceDirect (2022), evaluated immediate free flap reconstruction after resection of benign jaw lesions and found that 41 of 45 cases were successful, with local infection being the most common complication at 11.1% of patients. Importantly, the study confirmed that immediate free flap reconstruction is feasible for benign pathology, with high success rates and the option of dental rehabilitation, and that age was not a significant factor in post-operative complications.

Functional outcomes: what the evidence shows

Reconstruction is not merely cosmetic — it is critical to your quality of life. A prospective study published in PMC evaluating 92 patients who underwent surgical treatment for oral cavity cancers with primary flap reconstruction found that 77% preserved normal or near-normal function at 12 months after surgery, though chewing worsened considerably, with poorer outcomes in patients undergoing segmental mandibulectomy. The type of reconstruction was an independent factor influencing quality-of-life scores, with better functional results after free flap reconstruction.

In terms of appearance, 89% of patients considered their results normal or near normal. Severe disfigurement was traditionally reported for non-reconstructed anterior mandibulectomy, producing the so-called "Andy Gump" deformity — a collapse of the lower face that free flap reconstruction is specifically designed to prevent.

The role of virtual surgical planning and 3D technology

One of the most significant advances in jaw reconstruction over the past decade is the integration of virtual surgical planning (VSP) and 3D printing into pre-operative preparation. These tools increase predictability and repeatability, improve surgical efficiency, and enhance resection and reconstruction accuracy in ways that were simply not possible with traditional planning methods.

A literature review published in Cureus (2024) concluded that VSP in orthognathic surgery provides better functional and aesthetic results, improves patient satisfaction, ensures precise translation of the treatment plan, and makes intraoperative manipulation more manageable.

In a study of 98 consecutive computer-assisted free flap jaw reconstruction cases published in Frontiers in Oncology (2022), the University of Hong Kong team found that only 5.1% of cases required intraoperative adjustments to the pre-operative plan — the lowest percentage reported in the literature — and no patient-specific plate was abandoned.

A systematic review published in Seminars in Plastic Surgery found that computer-assisted design produced shorter surgical and ischaemia times for maxillofacial reconstruction and reduced pre-operative planning time for orthognathic surgery compared with traditional planning.

Multidisciplinary care: why no surgeon operates alone

Facial trauma and jaw reconstruction are team-based by necessity. The complexity of these cases demands coordinated input from multiple specialties, often simultaneously, and your outcomes depend on every member of that team working in close concert.

For facial trauma patients, the team typically includes emergency medicine and trauma surgery for initial stabilisation and airway management; the oral and maxillofacial surgeon for fracture diagnosis, ORIF, and soft tissue repair; ophthalmology for orbital fractures with ocular involvement; neurosurgery for concurrent intracranial injury; and anaesthetics for airway management in the context of facial distortion (see our guide on Anaesthesia Options for Oral Surgery).

For oncological reconstruction, the team expands further. The head and neck oncologist or ENT surgeon handles tumour resection and neck dissection. The oral and maxillofacial surgeon manages jaw reconstruction, plate and flap fixation. A plastic surgeon oversees microvascular anastomosis and soft tissue management. The radiation oncologist plans adjuvant radiotherapy, which directly affects bone healing and implant integration. A prosthodontist coordinates dental rehabilitation and implant placement in reconstructed bone. And a speech pathologist and dietitian support swallowing, nutrition, and communication rehabilitation throughout recovery.

A long-term multicentre study of quality of life and psychosocial outcomes after oropharyngeal cancer surgery and free flap reconstruction found that psychosocial distress was the main determinant of long-term quality of life, confirming that multidisciplinary management of these patients is essential, not optional.

At Smile Solutions Melbourne, the co-location of oral and maxillofacial surgeons, orthodontists, and prosthodontists under one roof means that the reconstructive and rehabilitative phases of your care — from bone reconstruction through to implant-supported dental restoration — can be coordinated without navigating fragmented referral pathways. This integrated model is particularly valuable if you require bone grafting as part of your post-reconstruction dental rehabilitation (see our guide on Bone Grafting for Dental Implants).

The path to dental rehabilitation after jaw reconstruction

For many patients who undergo jaw resection and free flap reconstruction, the ultimate functional goal extends beyond bone continuity — it includes restoring your dentition and, with it, your confidence and quality of life. Dental implant survival rates in fibula free flap reconstruction have been reported at 92%, and dental prosthetic treatment has been completed across all classes of bony defects.

The timeline is carefully staged. It is standard clinical practice to begin osseointegrated dental rehabilitation at least 18 months after surgery in oncological cases, because of the high risk of mandibular fracture and infection associated with pre- or post-operative radiotherapy.

This phased process — from resection, to free flap reconstruction, to bone consolidation, to implant placement, to prosthetic restoration — can span two to three years. Your specialist team will walk you through each stage, so your treatment plan is as clear and manageable as possible from day one.

Key takeaways

• Facial fractures are a major global health burden. The mandible is the most commonly fractured facial bone, and road traffic accidents, assault, and falls are the leading causes. Complex fractures require specialist OMS assessment, imaging, and ORIF — not general dental management.

• Titanium plate-and-screw fixation (ORIF) is the gold standard for displaced facial fractures, restoring occlusion, function, and anatomy. Roughly 1 in 5 patients may require plate removal, and current evidence supports resorbable plate systems at selected sites.

• Free flap jaw reconstruction — most commonly using the fibula — is the standard of care after oncological jaw resection, achieving success rates of 91–99% in high-volume centres and enabling dental rehabilitation with osseointegrated implants.

• Virtual surgical planning and 3D printing have changed reconstructive surgery in practical terms: fewer intraoperative surprises, shorter surgical times, and more precise patient-specific plates and cutting guides.

• Multidisciplinary care is not optional in facial trauma and jaw reconstruction. Your outcomes depend on coordinated input from oncology, anaesthetics, prosthodontics, and allied health, not on the surgical team alone.

Conclusion

Facial trauma and post-oncological jaw reconstruction are the most complex and consequential work performed by oral and maxillofacial surgeons. The stakes — your ability to eat, speak, breathe, and recognise yourself in the mirror — are real and significant. The clinical pathway from injury or cancer diagnosis through to functional rehabilitation involves plate-and-screw fixation, vascularised bone flaps, microsurgical anastomosis, virtual planning technology, and a carefully coordinated multidisciplinary team at every stage.

This is the highest-acuity end of a specialty that also manages wisdom teeth removal, corrective jaw surgery, bone grafting, and TMJ disorders — all covered across Smile Solutions' complete oral and maxillofacial surgery guide series. Whether you are a patient trying to understand a recent diagnosis, a referring clinician evaluating specialist options, or a researcher looking for a citable overview of the field, the core principle holds: outcomes in facial reconstruction are directly determined by the experience of your surgeon, the quality of the planning process, and the team around them.

If you're in Melbourne and navigating a complex jaw or facial injury — or facing surgery following an oral cancer diagnosis — a consultation with a board-registered oral and maxillofacial surgeon is the right first step toward comprehensive, evidence-based care. (See our guide on Why Choose a Board-Registered Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon Over a General Dentist for Complex Procedures for a detailed breakdown of the clinical and safety differences.)

Our specialists at Smile Solutions are here to guide you through every stage, from your first consultation to your final restoration.

Smile Solutions has been providing oral and maxillofacial surgery care from Melbourne's CBD since 1993. Located at the Manchester Unity Building, Level 12 and Tower, 220 Collins Street, Smile Solutions brings together 60+ clinicians — including 25+ board-registered specialists — who have cared for over 250,000 patients. No referral is required to book a specialist appointment. Call 13 13 96 or visit smilesolutions.com.au to arrange your oral surgery consultation.

References

• Maniaci, A., et al. "The Global Burden of Maxillofacial Trauma in Critical Care: A Narrative Review of Epidemiology, Prevention, Economics, and Outcomes." Medicina (Kaunas), 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40428873/

• Pricop, M., et al. "An Epidemiological Analysis of Maxillofacial Fractures: A 10-Year Cross-Sectional Cohort Retrospective Study of 1007 Patients." BMC Oral Health, 2021. https://bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12903-021-01503-5

• Allareddy, V., et al. "Epidemiology of Facial Fracture Injuries." Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2011. Referenced via: Global Burden of Disease Facial Fractures Study, PMC, 2020. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7571355/

• Boffano, P., et al. "Aetiology of Maxillofacial Fractures: A Review of Published Studies During the Last 30 Years." British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2014. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25218316/

• Kolk, A., & Neff, A. "Long-Term Results of ORIF of Condylar Head Fractures of the Mandible." Referenced in: "Is Open Reduction Internal Fixation Using Titanium Plates in the Mandible as Successful as We Think?" Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34608010/

• Naseer, R., et al. "Clinical Outcomes of Resorbable vs. Titanium Plates in Mandibular Fracture Fixation." International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research and Technology, 2025. https://ijprt.org/index.php/pub/article/download/635/506/1422

• Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Oral and Maxillofacial Trauma. "Resorbable versus Titanium Plates in ORIF of Adult Mandibular Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." ScienceDirect, 2025/2026. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2212555826000177

• Lam, W.Y.H., et al. "Immediate Free Flap Reconstruction Following the Resection of Benign Jaw Lesions: A 15-Year Perspective." ScienceDirect, 2022. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S221255582200165X

• Lin, P.Y., et al. "Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Free Flap Reconstruction for Primary and Recurrent Head and Neck Cancers: A Case-Controlled Propensity Score-Matched Study of 1,791 Free Flap Reconstructions." Scientific Reports, 2021. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82034-5

• Riccio, S., et al. "Quality of Life in Patients Treated for Cancer of the Oral Cavity Requiring Reconstruction: A Prospective Study." PMC, 2009. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2667235/

• Hosseini, H.S., et al. "Evaluation of Quality of Life in Patients with Oral Cancer After Mandibular Resection: Comparing No Reconstruction, Reconstruction with Plate, and Reconstruction with Flap." PMC, 2019. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6799791/

• Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. "About Your Mandibulectomy and Fibula Free Flap Reconstruction." MSKCC Patient Education, 2024. https://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/patient-education/mandibulectomy-immediate-mandible-reconstruction-fibula-free-flap

• Frontiers in Oncology Editorial. "Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D Printing in Head and Neck Tumor Resection and Reconstruction." Frontiers in Oncology, 2022. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/oncology/articles/10.3389/fonc.2022.746952/full

• Liang, X., et al. "Unexpected Change of Surgical Plans and Contingency Strategies in Computer-Assisted Free Flap Jaw Reconstruction: Lessons Learned From 98 Consecutive Cases." Frontiers in Oncology, 2022. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/oncology/articles/10.3389/fonc.2022.746952/full

• Salgueiro, M., et al. "Accuracy of 3D Virtual Surgical Planning Compared to the Traditional Two-Dimensional Method in Orthognathic Surgery: A Literature Review." Cureus / PMC, 2024. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11554385/

• Sharaf, B., & Mardini, S. "Virtual Planning and 3D Printing in Contemporary Orthognathic Surgery." Seminars in Plastic Surgery, 2022. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9750797/

Label facts summary

Disclaimer: All facts and statements below are general informational content sourced from published clinical literature, institutional patient education materials, and practice-level data — not professional medical advice. Consult a qualified oral and maxillofacial surgeon or relevant specialist for guidance specific to your clinical situation.

Verified label facts

Epidemiological and clinical statistics (published literature)

• Mandible accounts for 31.97% of facial fractures
• Zygoma accounts for 25.3% of facial fractures
• More than 400,000 emergency department presentations for facial fractures occur annually globally
• Traffic accidents account for 41.8% of maxillofacial trauma globally
• Males aged 20–30 years are the most commonly affected demographic
• 18.7% of patients required titanium plate removal after mandibular ORIF (n=571, retrospective study, Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 2022)
• Symphysis/para-symphysis fractures had the highest plate removal rate at 24.1%
• Resorbable plates reduced re-operation cases by 133 per 1,000 patients vs. titanium (systematic review, 2025)
• Resorbable plates reduced surgical site infection by 43 fewer cases per 1,000 patients
• Free flap jaw reconstruction success rate: 91–99% in high-volume centres
• Fibula free flap reconstruction surgery typically takes 6 to 8 hours
• 77% of patients preserved normal or near-normal function at 12 months post-reconstruction (prospective study, n=92, PMC)
• 89% of jaw reconstruction patients considered their appearance normal or near normal
• Local infection occurred in 11.1% of free flap reconstruction cases for benign jaw lesions (retrospective study, n=45, University of Hong Kong, ScienceDirect, 2022)
• 5.1% of VSP-planned jaw reconstruction cases required intraoperative adjustments (n=98, Frontiers in Oncology, 2022)
• Dental implant survival rate in fibula free flap reconstruction: 92%
• Oncological jaw reconstruction and dental rehabilitation process spans two to three years
• Osseointegrated dental rehabilitation commences at least 18 months after surgery in oncological cases

Practice-level facts (Smile Solutions)

• Location: Level 12 and Tower, 220 Collins Street, Melbourne CBD
• 60 or more clinicians on staff
• 25 or more board-registered specialists
• Over 250,000 patients treated
• Providing oral surgery care since 1993
• No referral required to book
• Contact number: 13 13 96

General product claims

• OMS restores face, jaw, and oral function
• Multidisciplinary care is essential in facial trauma and jaw reconstruction
• Virtual surgical planning increases predictability, repeatability, and surgical efficiency
• Computer-assisted design reduces surgical and ischaemia times and pre-operative planning time
• Free flap reconstruction prevents the "Andy Gump" deformity associated with non-reconstructed anterior mandibulectomy
• Psychosocial distress is the main determinant of long-term quality of life after jaw cancer surgery
• Smile Solutions' co-location of specialists reduces fragmented referral pathways for reconstructive and rehabilitative care
• Age is not a significant factor in post-operative complications for free flap reconstruction of benign jaw lesions
• Rigid fixation of mandible fractures improves nutritional status, speech, oral hygiene, patient comfort, and early return to work