Al-Moraissi E A, El-Sharkawy T M, Mounair R M, El-Ghareeb T I
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Thamar University, Thamar, Yemen; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Apr;44(4):470-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.10.017. Epub 2014 Nov 15.
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the clinical outcomes of the following four methods for the management of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis: gap arthroplasty (GA), interpositional gap arthroplasty (IPG) using the temporalis muscle, reconstruction of the TMJ using a costochondral graft (CCG), and alloplastic joint reconstruction (AJR) of the TMJ. A comprehensive electronic and manual search of the literature without date or language restriction was performed in December 2013 to identify randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and retrospective studies with the aim of comparing the four surgical modalities for TMJ ankylosis. Sixteen publications were included: seven were CCTs and nine were retrospective. A significant difference was found between GA and IPG in maximal inter-incisal opening (MIO) and recurrence rate (P = 0.04 and P = 0.02, respectively). A significant difference was found between IPG and CCG reconstruction in MIO (P = 0.01), but no significant difference with regard to the recurrence rate (P = 0.71). There was a significant difference between costochondral joint (CCJ) and AJR for MIO and pain (P = 0.04 and P = 0.03, respectively). The results of the meta-analysis showed that IPG results in a significant improvement in MIO and lower recurrence rate when compared to GA. Also, IPG shows a greater improvement in MIO and comparable recurrence rate when compared to CCG reconstruction. GA and CCG reconstruction have a comparable recurrence rate. Lastly, CCJ provides greater MIO when compared to AJR, whereas AJR is superior to CCJ in reducing pain.
进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估以下四种颞下颌关节(TMJ)强直治疗方法的临床结果:间隙成形术(GA)、使用颞肌的间置间隙成形术(IPG)、使用肋软骨移植(CCG)重建TMJ以及TMJ的异体关节重建(AJR)。2013年12月对文献进行了全面的电子和手动检索,检索无日期或语言限制,目的是识别随机对照试验、对照临床试验(CCT)和回顾性研究,以比较TMJ强直的四种手术方式。纳入了16篇出版物:7篇为CCT,9篇为回顾性研究。GA和IPG在最大切牙间开口(MIO)和复发率方面存在显著差异(分别为P = 0.04和P = 0.02)。IPG和CCG重建在MIO方面存在显著差异(P = 0.01),但在复发率方面无显著差异(P = 0.71)。肋软骨关节(CCJ)和AJR在MIO和疼痛方面存在显著差异(分别为P = 0.04和P = 0.03)。荟萃分析结果表明,与GA相比,IPG可使MIO显著改善且复发率降低。此外,与CCG重建相比,IPG在MIO方面改善更大且复发率相当。GA和CCG重建的复发率相当。最后,与AJR相比,CCJ可提供更大的MIO,而AJR在减轻疼痛方面优于CCJ。