Population Covered By The Guidance
This pathway provides guidance on the imaging of adult patients with facial trauma/injuries, to aid in diagnosis and management plan.
Lead Researcher: Renqiao Lan
Experts & Contributors: Ravinder Dhillon, Ferry Dharsono, Sudhakar Rao, Bronwyn Peirce, Kieran Kusel and Richard Mendelson
Date reviewed: Feb 2022. Further minor revision to text 2025
Date Published: June 2025
-
Conventional or high resolution multidetector computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for the radiographic evaluation of patients with facial trauma
-
Plain films are no longer a routine part of diagnostic imaging of patients with facial trauma
-
Imaging is not indicated for simple nasal fractures
-
Cone beam CT (CBCT) and ultrasonography (US) are emerging imaging modalities in assessing maxillofacial injuries
-
Ultrasonography (US) has shown high sensitivity and specificity in evaluating maxillofacial fractures. However, its use has been mainly limited to nasal and orbital traumas and is not recommended in acute and emergency settings
Date of literature search: February 2022
References are graded from Level I to V according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Levels of Evidence. Download the document
- Lo Casto A, Priolo GD, Garufi A, Purpura P, Salerno S, La Tona G, et al. Imaging evaluation of facial complex strut fractures. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2012;33(5):396-409. (Review article)
- Bernstein MP. The Imaging of Maxillofacial Trauma 2017. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2018;28(3):509-24. (Review article)
- Gómez Roselló E, Quiles Granado AM, Artajona Garcia M, Juanpere Martí S, Laguillo Sala G, Beltrán Mármol B, et al. Facial fractures: classification and highlights for a useful report. Insights Imaging. 2020;11(1):49. (Review article)
- Peeters N, Lemkens P, Leach R, Gemels B, Schepers S, Lemmens W. Facial trauma. B-ent. 2016;Suppl 26(2):1-18. (Review article)
- Hoffmann JF. An Algorithm for the Initial Management of Nasal Trauma. Facial Plast Surg. 2015;31(3):183-93. (Review article)
- Salvolini U. Traumatic injuries: imaging of facial injuries. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(6):1253-61. (Review article)
- Chukwulebe S, Hogrefe C. The Diagnosis and Management of Facial Bone Fractures. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2019;37(1):137-51. (Review article)
- Mehta N, Butala P, Bernstein MP. The imaging of maxillofacial trauma and its pertinence to surgical intervention. Radiol Clin North Am. 2012;50(1):43-57. (Review article)
- Shintaku WH, Venturin JS, Azevedo B, Noujeim M. Applications of cone-beam computed tomography in fractures of the maxillofacial complex. Dent Traumatol. 2009;25(4):358-66. (Review article)
- Ellis E, 3rd. Orbital trauma. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2012;24(4):629-48. (Review article)
- Gelesko S, Markiewicz MR, Bell RB. Responsible and prudent imaging in the diagnosis and management of facial fractures. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2013;25(4):545-60. (Review article)
- Sun JK, LeMay DR. Imaging of facial trauma. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2002;12(2):295-309. (Review article)
- Caranci F, Cicala D, Cappabianca S, Briganti F, Brunese L, Fonio P. Orbital fractures: role of imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2012;33(5):385-91. (Review article)
- Ceallaigh PO, Ekanaykaee K, Beirne CJ, Patton DW. Diagnosis and management of common maxillofacial injuries in the emergency department. Part 4: orbital floor and midface fractures. Emergency medicine journal : EMJ. 2007;24(4):292-3. (Review article)
- Ceallaigh PO, Ekanaykaee K, Beirne CJ, Patton DW. Diagnosis and management of common maxillofacial injuries in the emergency department. Part 3: Orbitozygomatic complex and zygomatic arch fractures. Emerg Med J. 2007;24(2):120-2. (Review article)
- Dreizin D, Nam AJ, Tirada N, Levin MD, Stein DM, Bodanapally UK, et al. Multidetector CT of Mandibular Fractures, Reductions, and Complications: A Clinically Relevant Primer for the Radiologist. Radiographics. 2016;36(5):1539-64. (Review article)
- Eng J, Sivam S. General Overview of the Facial Trauma Evaluation. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2022;30(1):1-9. (Review article)
- Gohel A, Oda M, Katkar AS, Sakai O. Multidetector Row Computed Tomography in Maxillofacial Imaging. Dent Clin North Am. 2018;62(3):453-65. (Review article)
- Kubal WS. Imaging of orbital trauma. Radiographics. 2008;28(6):1729-39. (Review article)
- Lynham AJ, Hirst JP, Cosson JA, Chapman PJ, McEniery P. Emergency department management of maxillofacial trauma. Emerg Med Australas. 2004;16(1):7-12. (Review article)
- Meara DJ. Diagnostic Imaging of the Maxillofacial Trauma Patient. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019;27(2):119-26. (Review article)
- Nardi C, Vignoli C, Pietragalla M, Tonelli P, Calistri L, Franchi L, et al. Imaging of mandibular fractures: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging. 2020;11(1):30. (Review article)
- Thelen J, Bhatt AA, Bhatt AA. Acute ocular traumatic imaging: what the radiologist should know [corrected]. Emerg Radiol. 2017;24(5):585-92. (Review article)
- Truong TA. Initial Assessment and Evaluation of Traumatic Facial Injuries. Semin Plast Surg. 2017;31(2):69-72. (Review article)
- Tuckett JW, Lynham A, Lee GA, Perry M, Harrington U. Maxillofacial trauma in the emergency department: a review. Surgeon. 2014;12(2):106-14. (Level I evidence)
- Uzelac A, Gean AD. Orbital and facial fractures. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2014;24(3):407-24, vii. (Review article)
- Winegar BA, Murillo H, Tantiwongkosi B. Spectrum of critical imaging findings in complex facial skeletal trauma. Radiographics. 2013;33(1):3-19. (Review article)
- Dreizin D, Nam AJ, Hirsch J, Bernstein MP. New and emerging patient-centered CT imaging and imageguided treatment paradigms for maxillofacial trauma. Emerg Radiol. 2018;25(5):533-45. (Review article)
- Alimohammadi R. Imaging of Dentoalveolar and Jaw Trauma. Radiol Clin North Am. 2018;56(1):105-24. (Review article)
- Ceallaigh PO, Ekanaykaee K, Beirne CJ, Patton DW. Diagnosis and management of common maxillofacial injuries in the emergency department. Part 2: mandibular fractures. Emerg Med J. 2006;23(12):927-8. (Review article)
Pathway User Guide
Yellow Boxes Denotes extra information. Some contain single or multiple white sub-boxes, click a white box to reveal detailed information in a pop-up.
White Boxes: Denotes standard pathway steps. (If inside a yellow box, they open a specific pop-up).
Zoom & Pan Controls: Use + / − or the slider to zoom. Reset returns to default. Tick Panning to drag the diagram when zoomed.
Blue “View Full Screen” Button: Opens the whole diagram in a large, full-screen pop-up window. Use Close to exit.
The relative radiation level (RRL) of each imaging investigation is displayed in the pop up box.
| SYMBOL | RRL | EFFECTIVE DOSE RANGE |
|---|---|---|
| None | 0 | |
| Minimal | < 1 millisieverts | |
| Low | 1-5 mSv | |
| Medium | 5-10 mSv | |
| High | >10 mSv |
Disclaimer
Status Of Recommendations Each pathway is designed to assist clinicians in situations when faced with a large array of possible diagnostic tests and examinations. However, it is recognised that diagnostic practice may differ from a particular pathway depending on local availability of equipment and expertise, as well as the experience of individual clinicians. Therefore each pathway is neither a rigid set of rules, nor a substitute for clinical assessment, and individual patient circumstances should always be considered.
Spotted an error or outdated info? Click to tell us.
Facial Trauma
Facial fractures are often classified by upper face fractures (including fracture of the frontal bone and orbital roof), midface fractures (including nasal, orbital, maxillary, zygomatic bones, and more complex Le Fort fractures), and mandible fractures
-
Facial fractures are often classified by upper face fractures involving the frontal bone and orbital roof; midface fractures involving nasal, orbital, maxillary, zygomatic bones, and more complex Le Fort fractures; and lower face or mandible fractures
-
Nasal bone fractures are diagnosed through history and careful clinical examination. Routine imaging offers little clinical benefit
Classification of fractures:
-
Mid-face fractures:
Multidetector CT has provided increased detail of the complexity of some mid-facial fractures, leading to innovative classification systems. However, the Le Fort classification remains relevant and widely used in clinical practice .
These fractures are classified into three groups based on the direction of the fracture: horizontal, pyramidal or transverse. The pterygoid plate is involved in all types of Le Fort fractures. This may result in a pterygomaxillary separation.
Le Fort Type 1 (Guerin fracture):
-
Horizontal fracture. Trans-maxillary horizontal maxillary fracture which separates the teeth from the upper face; the fracture line extends through walls of maxillary antra, through the nasal septum and the pterygoid plates and causes palate-facial separation.
Le Fort Type 2:
-
Pyramidal fracture. The teeth are at the pyramid base and nasofrontal suture at the apex. A fracture passes through pterygoid plates, posterior and lateral walls of the maxillary sinus. A fracture line passes inferior to the body of zygoma and then crosses the inferior orbital rim, orbital floor and medial wall of orbit, crossing the midline near the nasofrontal suture.
Le Fort Type 3:
-
Transverse fracture causing craniofacial separation. A fracture line passes from the nasofrontal area/suture, maxillo-frontal suture across medial, posterior and lateral orbital walls, the zygomatic arch and through the pterygoid plates.
Le Fort fractures may be associated with other injuries such as dental or alveolar ridge fractures, cerebrospinal fluid leaks (most common with Type 3), and severe epistaxis.
-
Other facial injuries
These include mandibular fractures, paranasal sinus fractures, frontal sinus fractures and nasal fractures.
Computed Tomography (CT)
Computed tomography (CT) (conventional CT or high resolution multidetector CT) is considered the gold standard in facial trauma imaging; it can accurately detect and characterise fractures and their associated complications
-
Conventional or high resolution multidetector computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for the radiographic evaluation of patients with facial trauma, especially in patients with orbital, maxillofacial and multiple facial injuries
-
CT is superior to other imaging modalities in detecting facial fractures and can accurately define the direction, extent, and displacement of facial fractures as well as assess for associated soft tissue injuries. CT can assist with clinical management and surgical planning
CT +/- OPG
Multidetector CT provides nearly 100% sensitivity in detecting both displaced and nondisplaced fractures, and orthopantomogram (OPG) helps elucidate the relationship of fractures at the mandibular angle to the surrounding teeth and evaluate dental root fractures
-
Orthopantomogram (OPG) was used as a routine and important imaging investigation in patients with mandibular fractures, but is now only recommended as an adjunct imaging test to CT, to help facilitate both diagnosis and surgical planning, when CT alone is insufficient
Plain radiograph + CBCT or OPG
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) can adequately recognise mandibular fractures at low radiation dose
-
Cone bean CT (CBCT) has been increasingly used to evaluate isolated mandibular fractures and dentoalveolar trauma, especially in outpatient clinics and ambulatory patients, owing to its low radiation dose, excellent spatial resolution and convenience
-
Plain films are no longer considered a routine part of diagnostic imaging of patients with facial trauma . However, in the absence of conventional CT, plain films are useful in the initial screening for mandibular fractures, but CBCT or OPG should be used to further evaluate and guide optimal management
