-
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery Oct 2021To critically examine reported data to compare patient outcomes between load-sharing and load-bearing plate fixation for edentulous mandibular fractures. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To critically examine reported data to compare patient outcomes between load-sharing and load-bearing plate fixation for edentulous mandibular fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were designed to test the null hypothesis of no difference in postoperative outcomes between load-sharing and load-bearing plate fixation in atrophic, edentulous mandibular fractures. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Elsevier text mining tool database, and clinicaltrials.gov trial registries were queried up until July 2016. The quality of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method.
RESULTS
A total of 1212 studies were screened for inclusion of which we included 1 high-quality Cochrane review, 6 narrative reviews, and 21 publications of case reports and case series. Overall, the quality of evidence was low. No difference was found between load-bearing and load-sharing fixation in functional recovery, nonunion, or infection. An uncontrolled case series portrayed complete functional and morphological restoration in 96.9% of patients (83.2-99.5; 95% confidence interval) in load-bearing osteosynthesis while another demonstrated the same outcome in only 40.0% of patients (17.5-65.0; 95% confidence interval).
CONCLUSIONS
The authors did not find a statistically significant difference between load-bearing and load-sharing plate fixation in edentulous atrophic mandibular fracture patients; although this finding may be influenced by type 2 statistical error. Surgeons should continue to use their best clinical judgment in deciding on treatment approach for these challenging fractures. Future studies with higher level evidence are necessary to guide optimal fracture management.
Topics: Bone Plates; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Mouth, Edentulous; Weight-Bearing
PubMed: 34705386
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007927 -
The British Journal of Oral &... Oct 2021Any procedure that aims to manage maxillofacial fracture is incomplete without meticulous maxillomandibular fixation (MMF). For decades, Erich arch bars (EABs) have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Any procedure that aims to manage maxillofacial fracture is incomplete without meticulous maxillomandibular fixation (MMF). For decades, Erich arch bars (EABs) have been used for this purpose, but with the advent of bone-supported arch bars (BSABs), more surgeons now prefer them to conventional EABs. The present study was designed to identify which of the two methods is best. An exhaustive literature search was conducted in June 2020 on various electronic databases to select studies that compared EABs and BSABs. Outcomes such as duration of placement, stability, oral hygiene, and complications such as damage to the roots of teeth and needle-stick injury, were analysed. A total of 716 studies were identified, of which seven were eligible for inclusion. The meta-analysis showed that the use of BSABs is significantly faster with no needle penetration and better oral hygiene. Both arch bars are equally stable, but root damage is an associated complication. The available literature to date shows that BSABs are a better option than EABs. However, further research is recommended, as these studies are associated with various confounding factors.
Topics: Bone and Bones; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Jaw Fixation Techniques; Mandibular Fractures
PubMed: 34315565
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2021.01.004 -
The Journal of Craniofacial SurgeryMandible fractures can be treated with different plate systems, that is, miniplates or three-dimensional (3D) plates. This systematic review describes the effectiveness...
OBJECTIVES
Mandible fractures can be treated with different plate systems, that is, miniplates or three-dimensional (3D) plates. This systematic review describes the effectiveness and clinical outcomes of 3D plates used in fractures of the mandible and aims to critically evaluate its risks and benefits.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive electronic search was conducted without date but with restriction to articles written in English. Studies in humans, including randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies, were included. The outcome parameters measured were number of patients, fracture classification, results, follow-up period, postoperative complications, and mean age of patients. Major complications were defined as those needing additional surgical intervention, for example, malocclusion, infection or plate fracture. Accordingly, complications not needing additional surgical intervention were defined as minor (ie, dehiscence, trismus).
RESULTS
Guided by the PRISMA statement and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the authors identified 44 publications with a total of 1790 patients. Among the articles selected for the final review, there were 32 reported prospective studies, 12 reported retrospective studies. Regarding the evaluation of quality, 8 studies showed a low value of the risk of bias, 17 a moderate risk, and 19 a high risk. There were statistically significant advantages for 3D plates in mandibular fractures in terms of postoperative complications, for example, wound dehiscences or plate fracture.
CONCLUSIONS
The 3D plate is an effective treatment modality for mandibular fractures, with low incidence of major complications, decreased length of operation time, and increased stability of osteosynthesis.
Topics: Bone Plates; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34172684
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007709 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2022There is no accepted method of reporting mandibular fracture that reflects incidence, treatment and outcome for individual cases. As most series include anatomical site...
There is no accepted method of reporting mandibular fracture that reflects incidence, treatment and outcome for individual cases. As most series include anatomical site only for all fractures, the aim was to establish a new method to report fractures based on a systematic review of the literature and an internal audit. The classification proposed is: Class I; condyle, II; angle, IIc; II+condyle, III; body/symphysis, IIIc; III+condyle, IV; multiple fractures not including condyle, IVc; IV+condyle, V; bilateral condyle±other fracture(s). A total of 10,971 adult and 914 paediatric cases were analyzed through systematic review, and 833 from the regional audit. Only 32% (14/44) of reported series could be reclassified which, when added to the audit data, showed Class IV was most common (29%), with similar proportions of Class III, Class IIIc and Class II (18-23%). External validation (literature review) in terms of treatment and outcome was non-informative, but the internal validation (audit) demonstrated an increasing requirement for adding maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) as class increased. The heterogeneity of data reporting found in the systematic review confirms the need for a classification such as this, likely to enhance comparison of varying management protocols.
Topics: Adult; Child; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Incidence; Jaw Fixation Techniques; Mandibular Condyle; Mandibular Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34092451
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.02.012 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Aug 2021Mandibular collum fractures among growing patients can lead to abnormal growth, function, esthetics and ultimately quality of life. Among the proposed treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Mandibular collum fractures among growing patients can lead to abnormal growth, function, esthetics and ultimately quality of life. Among the proposed treatment alternatives, orthopaedic treatment with functional appliances has been suggested, with encouraging results. Aim of the present systematic review was to critically appraise existing evidence on the outcome of functional appliance treatment among growing patients with mandibular collum fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Eight databases were searched up to October 2020 for randomised and non-randomised clinical studies assessing functional appliance treatment outcome for children with mandibular fractures. After duplicate study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment, random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by assessment of the quality of evidence with GRADE.
RESULTS
A total of 8 unique studies (one prospective and nine retrospective non-randomised) with 223 children could be identified. Functional appliance treatment was associated with greater anteroposterior condyle dimensions of the injured condyle compared with the contralateral healthy condyle (3 studies; MD = 0.87 mm; 95% CI = 0.30 to 1.45 mm; p = .003). No difference was found in the mesiodistal condyle size between the injured and the contralateral healthy joint (3 studies; MD = -0.05 mm; 95% CI = -1.05 to 0.95 mm; p = .92), but collum length was smaller at the injured side compared with the contralateral one (1 study; MD = -2.89 mm; 95% CI = -5.29 to -0.49 mm; p = .02). Treatment outcome might be influenced by patient age, patient sex and severity/localisation of the fracture, but the quality of evidence for all analyses was very low due to methodological limitations leading to bias.
CONCLUSIONS
While some evidence exists that functional appliances might lead to good clinical rehabilitation of fractured mandibular condyles, including considerable bone remodelling, available studies are small and have methodological weaknesses.
Topics: Child; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 33963591
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13178 -
Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 2021The aim of this review was to evaluate the survival rate of axial and tilted implants in rehabilitation of edentulous jaws using all on four concept.
AIM
The aim of this review was to evaluate the survival rate of axial and tilted implants in rehabilitation of edentulous jaws using all on four concept.
SETTING AND DESIGN
Systematic Review.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature review was performed in MEDLINE, PubMed Central (PMC), Google scholar, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Hand searches were conducted of the bibliographic of related journals and systematic reviews. A total of 380 articles were obtained from the intial screening process. Of these articles, 25 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The authors performed evaluation of articles independently as well as data extraction and quality assessment.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED
Qualitative analysis.
RESULTS
The major prosthetic complication was the fracture of the acrylic prosthesis. The mean cumulative survival rate of implants (72-132 months) were 94% to 98%. The prosthesis survival rate (12 months) was between 99% to 100%. The averaged bone loss was 1.3 ±0.4 mm (12-60 months). No Significant difference was found between survival rates of axial and tilted implants nor between maxilla and mandible.
CONCLUSION
All on four concept can be employed successfully in the edentulous patients with resorbed ridges while improving their quality of life and reducing morbidity. However,randomized clinical trials with large sampling size and long term follow up should be incorporated.
Topics: Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Prostheses and Implants; Quality of Life; Survival Rate
PubMed: 33835063
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_100_20 -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Mar 2021The role of denosumab in patients with resectable giant cell tumour of bone remains unclear. We asked the following research question: for patients (aged ≥ 12 years)...
The role of denosumab in patients with resectable giant cell tumour of bone remains unclear. We asked the following research question: for patients (aged ≥ 12 years) with resectable giant cell tumour of bone, what are the benefits and harms of denosumab compared with no denosumab in terms of (1) facilitation of surgery (operative time, blood loss), (2) disease recurrence, (3) pain control, (4) disease stability, and (5) adverse effects (e.g., malignant transformation, osteonecrosis of jaw, atypical femur fracture)? One previous systematic review addressed only one outcome-disease recurrence. Therefore, we undertook this new systematic review to address the above five outcomes. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases were searched on June 30, 2020. This systematic review included one previous systematic review and five comparative studies. Due to poor quality, non-randomized studies fraught with selection bias, it is difficult to determine if a significant difference exists in the outcomes for surgical giant cell tumour of bone with perioperative denosumab. There were no reported cases of adverse effects from denosumab. To date, there is insufficient evidence to understand the value of denosumab in the perioperative setting in patients with giant cell tumour of bone.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Bone Neoplasms; Denosumab; Giant Cell Tumor of Bone; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33809979
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28020124 -
The British Journal of Oral &... Apr 2021The treatment of mandibular fractures by gunshot ranges from late conservative repair to more aggressive early repair in a single stage. Treatments that preserve bony... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The treatment of mandibular fractures by gunshot ranges from late conservative repair to more aggressive early repair in a single stage. Treatments that preserve bony architecture as much as possible should be used, minimising patient morbidity and the complexity of future surgeries. The purpose of this study was to use a systematic review to determine which method of treatment was most effective for mandibular fractures by gunshot. Searches were conducted on Medline via PubMed, Scopus, Central Cochrane, and Sigle via Open Grey up to August 2019. Four studies were eligible to this systematic review, considering the previously establish inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 211 patients were evaluated. The mandibular body was the region more fractured followed by the symphyseal/parasymphyseal region. The closed treatment with intermaxillary fixation (IMF) was the most used followed by open surgery with internal rigid fixation (IRF) and external fixator. Considering the total adverse effects, the meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the IMF and IRF groups (p=0.840), but IMF showed five times less infection and IRF six times less malunion. The algorithm was delineated from the types of injuries by gunshot, proposing forms of treatment from initial stabilisation to functional rehabilitation with implant-supported prostheses. The treatment of mandibular fractures by gunshot remains a challenge for surgeons. There was a statistically significant prevalence of success in the IRF group, however this group was also associated with a higher index of infection than the IMF group. New studies with high methodological quality and larger numbers of participants are needed to offer more safety for surgeons who treat patients with mandibular fractures by gunshot.
Topics: Algorithms; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Jaw Fixation Techniques; Mandibular Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33678448
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.08.019 -
International Journal of Oral and... Nov 2021The aim of this review was to compare mandibular angle fracture fixation methods that were evaluated through randomized clinical trials considering postoperative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this review was to compare mandibular angle fracture fixation methods that were evaluated through randomized clinical trials considering postoperative complications. Additionally, different treatment methods were ranked based on their performance. A systematic review was performed based on the Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines. The quality of evidence and network meta-analysis were conducted using the GRADE tool and R software, respectively. Four databases were searched, and the papers were selected based on the PICOS strategy. A total of 3584 papers were found. After screening 15 papers were included. One plate placed on lateral border (tension zone) presented lower risk than one plate placed on superior border (tension zone) for infection [risk ratio (RR): 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33 to 0.71] and plate removal necessity (RR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.69), with moderate quality of evidence. There were no significant differences among the mandibular angle fracture treatments for malocclusion and paraesthesia outcomes. In conclusion, one plate placed on the lateral border in the tension zone is the best choice regarding postoperative infection and plate removal necessity when fixing mandibular angle fractures. None of the tested fixation methods were associated with a significant risk of malocclusion and paraesthesia events.
Topics: Bone Plates; Fracture Fixation; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Humans; Mandibular Fractures; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33676800
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.02.009 -
Facial Plastic Surgery : FPS Oct 2021Standard treatment of mandibular nonunion includes debridement and application of maxillomandibular or rigid internal fixation techniques, with adjunctive bone grafting...
Standard treatment of mandibular nonunion includes debridement and application of maxillomandibular or rigid internal fixation techniques, with adjunctive bone grafting when necessary. Frequently described in the orthopaedic literature, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound therapy (LIPUS) is a noninvasive treatment modality used to accelerate healing of fresh fractures and established nonunions. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the extent of LIPUS study in the treatment of mandibular nonunions to identify whether LIPUS represents an effective nonsurgical alternative or adjunct for nonunion management. A literature review was conducted to investigate published reports on the utilization of LIPUS in treating mandible fracture nonunions. The search yielded two randomized controlled trials demonstrating favorable healing parameters in fresh human mandible fractures treated with LIPUS, two randomized controlled trials demonstrating osteogenic differentiation in human mandibular fracture cellular components, and one study reporting improved healing at rabbit mandibular osteotomy sites. No articles published reports studying LIPUS in facial fracture nonunion were identified. This report reviews published literature on mandibular nonunions, and the evidence of LIPUS use in long bone nonunions. There are no known studies presenting LIPUS treatment of mandible fracture nonunions. However, on the basis of published orthopaedic data, LIPUS therapy could be considered as an adjunct or alternative to traditional surgical management of select mandible fracture nonunions.
Topics: Animals; Fracture Healing; Mandible; Mandibular Fractures; Osteogenesis; Rabbits; Ultrasonic Therapy; Ultrasonic Waves
PubMed: 33634454
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1724123