Suppr超能文献

髁头骨折的治疗:结局的系统评价

Condyle head fracture management: A systematic review of outcomes.

作者信息

Chieng Chiew Ying, Patel Anika, Nazir Hira, Ali Sana, Bhatti Nabeel, Mcleod Niall

机构信息

Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel Road, London, E1 1FR, United Kingdom.

Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel Road, London, E1 1FR, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2024 Dec;52(12):1476-1484. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2024.08.019. Epub 2024 Aug 22.

Abstract

The management of Condylar Head fractures (CHFs) has historically been with closed treatments(CTR); however, contemporary studies suggest that Open Reduction and Internal Fixation(ORIF) may produce better clinical and radiographic results. Our primary aim was to review the literature on the clinical and radiological outcomes of open and closed management of CHFs. A systematic literature search was undertaken using EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, using PRISMA guidelines, for all studies relating to outcomes following CHF. The inclusion criteria include 1) studies focused on CHF in adult patients that included at least 20 cases 2) published in English language. ROBINS-1 tool was used for risk assessment. Data extracted was analysed and compared using the relative risks. A total of 29 studies reporting on 1550 ORIF and 798 CTR were included. ORIF resulted in significantly less trismus (RR 9.5), chin deviation (RR 7.3), malocclusion (RR 6.5), TMJ clicking (RR 4.3) and pain(RR 12.6) than CTR. Due to the substantial heterogeneity of studies, firm conclusions are difficult but there does appear to be objective benefits in outcomes following ORIF than CTR. Satisfactory results may however be achieved with CTR. Further large studies using standardised outcome measurements will be required to help elucidate exactly which CHF are best served by ORIF.

摘要

髁突头部骨折(CHFs)的治疗在历史上一直采用闭合治疗(CTR);然而,当代研究表明,切开复位内固定术(ORIF)可能会产生更好的临床和影像学结果。我们的主要目的是回顾关于CHFs开放和闭合治疗的临床和放射学结果的文献。按照PRISMA指南,利用EMBASE、MEDLINE和PubMed对所有与CHF治疗结果相关的研究进行了系统的文献检索。纳入标准包括:1)针对成年患者CHF的研究,病例数至少20例;2)以英文发表。使用ROBINS-1工具进行风险评估。提取的数据采用相对风险进行分析和比较。共纳入29项研究,报告了1550例ORIF和798例CTR的情况。与CTR相比,ORIF导致的牙关紧闭(相对风险9.5)、颏部偏斜(相对风险7.3)、错牙合(相对风险6.5)、颞下颌关节弹响(相对风险4.3)和疼痛(相对风险12.6)明显更少。由于研究存在很大的异质性,很难得出确凿的结论,但与CTR相比,ORIF治疗后的结果似乎确实有客观益处。不过,CTR也可能取得满意的结果。需要进一步开展使用标准化结果测量的大型研究,以确切阐明哪些CHF最适合采用ORIF治疗。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验