| Objective: The aims of the present study were to 1)evaluate clinical outcomes between different fixation methods in the management of mandibular fractures and 2)determine which fixation method is the best option for the treatment of mandibular fractures.Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines,examining Medline-Ovid,Embase,and Pubmed databases.inclusion criteria were studies in humans,including randomized controlled trials,controlled clinical trials,and retrospective studies,with the aim of comparing the two techniques.In addition,the incidence of complications was evaluated.Results: Thirty-two publications were included: 20 randomized controlled trials,4 controlled clinical trials,and 8 retrospective studies.18 studies showed a low risk for bias,7studies showed a moderate risk for bias,and 7studies showed a high risk for bias.There were statistically significant advantages for 3-dimensional miniplate and lag screws.There was no statistically significant difference between locking plates and standard miniplates(P =0.2).The cumulative odds ratio was 0.64,meaning that the use of locking miniplate in the fixation of MFs decreases the risk for postoperative complications by 36% over the use of standard miniplates.Conclusions: The results of the meta-analysis showed lower complication rates with use of 3D plate compared with the use of 2 miniplates in the management of MFs,also this was statistically significant.In addition,the results of the meta-analysis found that the use of lag screws is superior to using miniplates in reducing the incidence of postoperative complications in the management of MFs as well as locking miniplates also indicates that the 2.0-mm locking miniplate is a prospective fixation system in the treatment of maxillofacial fractures. |
PDF Full Text Request