(Department of Dentistry), Section of Oral and Maxilofacial Surgery, Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri (UFVJM), Rua da Glória, 187, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Sep;25(3):289-301. doi: 10.1007/s10006-020-00937-5. Epub 2021 Jan 4.
To compare resorbable plates with titanium plates for the fixation of zygomatic fractures, taking into account postoperative complications.
This systematic review followed the guidelines of PRISMA and the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook and was registered in PROSPERO. The electronic search was performed in the Web of Science, PubMed, Virtual Health Library, and Cochrane Library databases and in the gray literature. The study selection and the data extraction were performed by three calibrated and independent researchers. The assessment of the risk of bias in the studies was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for clinical trials. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager Software version 5.3, using the Peto's Odds Ratios (PORs), and when I > 30, the random effect model was used. The evaluation of the quality of the evidence was carried out through GRADE.
A total of 2651 studies were screened and only nine were included; 7 of which were used for quantitative assessment. The follow-up time for patients ranged from 6 months to 5 years. All studies showed a low risk of bias in the "incomplete outcome data" domain. The need for plate removal (POR: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.81, I = 0%) and dehiscence (POR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.63, I = not applied) was lower for the group of patients who used resorbable plates than for titanium plates.
There was no difference in the occurrence of infection, diplopia, or paresthesia between the fixation methods. Resorbable plates showed better postoperative clinical performance.
比较可吸收板与钛板固定颧骨骨折的效果，考虑术后并发症。
本系统评价遵循 PRISMA 指南和 Cochrane 手册的建议，并在 PROSPERO 中进行了注册。电子检索在 Web of Science、PubMed、虚拟健康图书馆和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库以及灰色文献中进行。研究选择和数据提取由三名经过校准和独立的研究人员进行。使用 Cochrane 临床试验偏倚风险工具评估研究的偏倚风险。使用 Review Manager Software 版本 5.3 进行荟萃分析，使用 Peto 的优势比（PORs），当 I > 30 时，使用随机效应模型。通过 GRADE 评估证据质量。
共筛选出 2651 项研究，仅纳入了 9 项研究；其中 7 项用于定量评估。患者的随访时间从 6 个月到 5 年不等。所有研究在“结局数据不完整”领域均显示出低偏倚风险。与钛板相比，使用可吸收板的患者需要去除钢板（POR：0.11，95%CI：0.02 至 0.81，I = 0%）和裂开（POR 0.12，95%CI 0.02 至 0.63，I = 未应用）的可能性更低。
两种固定方法在感染、复视或感觉异常的发生率方面没有差异。可吸收板具有更好的术后临床效果。
