Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Clin Otolaryngol. 2019 Nov;44(6):968-974. doi: 10.1111/coa.13415. Epub 2019 Oct 8.
This study evaluated the efficacy of piezoelectric osteotomy in reducing oedema and ecchymosis during rhinoplasty via a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Two authors independently searched the referenced databases. PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, the Web of Science, the Cochrane library and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched from inception to January 2019.
Sufficient data were retrieved for a meta-analysis of six trials with a total of 327 patients.
They included studies that compared piezoelectric osteotomy (treatment groups) with conventional osteotomy (control group). The outcomes of interest were operative time, mucosal injury, oedema, ecchymosis and postoperative pain. Baseline study characteristics, quality of study, numbers of patients in the treatment and control groups and outcomes were extracted.
Intraoperative mucosal injury was significantly lower in the treatment group vs the control group, but operative time was longer in the treatment group. Eyelid oedema and ecchymosis in the first seven days postoperatively were statistically decreased in the treatment group vs the control group. In addition, pain in the first three days postoperatively was statistically decreased in the treatment group vs the control group. However, in a subgroup analysis according to osteotomy visibility in the control group (blind osteotomy vs osteotomy under direct vision), there was no significant difference in oedema and ecchymosis between treatment and osteotomy under direct vision.
Piezoelectric osteotomy during rhinoplasty can reduce eyelid oedema and eyelid ecchymosis compared to conventional osteotomy. However, piezoelectric osteotomy had no significant advantages in terms of postoperative oedema and ecchymosis compared to osteotomy under direct vision.
本研究通过系统评价和荟萃分析评估了在鼻整形术中使用压电骨切开术减少肿胀和瘀斑的效果。
两位作者独立检索参考文献数据库。系统检索了 PubMed、Embase、SCOPUS、Web of Science、Cochrane 图书馆和 Google Scholar 数据库，检索时间从建库至 2019 年 1 月。
共有 6 项试验（共 327 例患者）的数据足以进行荟萃分析。
这些研究比较了压电骨切开术（治疗组）与传统骨切开术（对照组）。感兴趣的结果包括手术时间、黏膜损伤、肿胀、瘀斑和术后疼痛。提取了基线研究特征、研究质量、治疗组和对照组的患者数量和结果。
治疗组术中黏膜损伤明显低于对照组，但治疗组手术时间较长。治疗组术后第 1-7 天眼睑肿胀和瘀斑明显减少，术后第 1-3 天疼痛明显减少。然而，根据对照组骨切开术的可视性（盲切与直视下骨切开）进行亚组分析，治疗组与直视下骨切开组在肿胀和瘀斑方面无显著差异。
与传统骨切开术相比，鼻整形术中使用压电骨切开术可减少眼睑肿胀和瘀斑。然而，与直视下骨切开术相比，压电骨切开术在术后肿胀和瘀斑方面没有明显优势。
