Minne Ties Hybrid Arch Bar System vs. Erich Arch Bars: A Cadaveric Comparison Study
Jaw fracture management significantly advanced with the introduction of Erich Arch Bars (EABs) during World War II, becoming the gold standard for maxillomandibular fixation (MMF). EABs, however, are time-consuming, pose risks of sharps injuries, and hinder oral hygiene and patient comfort. This study tested the Minne Ties Hybrid Arch Bar System (MTHAB), a novel MMF technology. This cadaveric study used specimens with near-complete dentition to compare MTHAB and EABs. The technologies were applied by trained surgeons to measure occlusal forces, increasing elastic loads, and application and removal times. Surgeons completed structured usability surveys. The results indicated that MTHAB significantly reduced application time (19.8 ± 4.1 min versus 35.2 ± 5.7 min, <i>p</i> = 0.0027) and removal time (1.6 ± 0.4 min versus 5.1 ± 2.1 min, <i>p</i> = 0.0465) compared to EABs, while also being rated higher for ease of use and safety. Both technologies achieved acceptable occlusion forces, although MTHAB needed more elastics to achieve comparable forces to EABs. While MTHAB appears promising, future clinical trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes, fixation stability, and patient selection. MTHAB represents a potential advancement in MMF technology, balancing surgical efficiency, safety, and fixation strength.
Authors
- Alan W. Johnson (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0035-9959)
- Jeffrey Mella (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6020-5839)
- François Proulx
Institutions
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction
- Published
- 2026-01-20
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.3390/cmtr19010007
- Primary Topic
- Facial Trauma and Fracture Management
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- University of Minnesota