The Reconstruction of Mandible Defects in War Injuries: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Virginia Libraries Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-29 DOI:10.1177/19433875231198947
Umar Rehman, Melissa Shemie, Mohammad Sohaib Sarwar, Oluwasemilore Adebayo, Peter A Brennan
{"title":"The Reconstruction of Mandible Defects in War Injuries: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Umar Rehman, Melissa Shemie, Mohammad Sohaib Sarwar, Oluwasemilore Adebayo, Peter A Brennan","doi":"10.1177/19433875231198947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>There has been an increasing trend in maxillofacial injuries associated with combat trauma. Within the maxillofacial complex, the mandible is the most likely structure to be damaged during combat. The structural deficits as a result can be reconstructed with many options. These include vascularised bone grafts (VBGs), non-vascularised bone grafts (NVBGs), alloplastic implants, reconstruction bars and distraction osteogenesis. This study aimed to determine the common modality and efficacy of mandibular reconstruction in combat trauma-related defects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was conducted on Pubmed, Prospero, Dynamed, DARE, EMBASE, COCHRANE and BMJ databases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria identifying 165 patients requiring mandibular reconstruction. Non-vascularised iliac bone graft (n = 137) was the most common method followed by ileac crest bone chips harvest using Dacron urethran osteomesh tray (n = 24) and frontoparietal grafts (n = 4). Meta-analysis of five out of six trials demonstrated an overall success rate of 85% (95% CI 79-90; I<sup>2</sup> = 59%). A total of 13% (n = 22) of reconstructions failed either completely or partially and 21% (n = 34) of patients suffered postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>NVBGs are a practical, cost-effective and favourable method of war zone management of mandibular defects with success rates comparable to those reported in the civilian literature. However, general trauma principles take precedence to rule out life-threatening injuries. Due consideration of patient factors, surgical factors, and available resources are required in the first-line management of combat-related mandibular defects.</p>","PeriodicalId":29991,"journal":{"name":"Virginia Libraries","volume":"47 1","pages":"160-168"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11107824/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virginia Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19433875231198947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: There has been an increasing trend in maxillofacial injuries associated with combat trauma. Within the maxillofacial complex, the mandible is the most likely structure to be damaged during combat. The structural deficits as a result can be reconstructed with many options. These include vascularised bone grafts (VBGs), non-vascularised bone grafts (NVBGs), alloplastic implants, reconstruction bars and distraction osteogenesis. This study aimed to determine the common modality and efficacy of mandibular reconstruction in combat trauma-related defects.

Methods: A literature search was conducted on Pubmed, Prospero, Dynamed, DARE, EMBASE, COCHRANE and BMJ databases.

Results: A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria identifying 165 patients requiring mandibular reconstruction. Non-vascularised iliac bone graft (n = 137) was the most common method followed by ileac crest bone chips harvest using Dacron urethran osteomesh tray (n = 24) and frontoparietal grafts (n = 4). Meta-analysis of five out of six trials demonstrated an overall success rate of 85% (95% CI 79-90; I2 = 59%). A total of 13% (n = 22) of reconstructions failed either completely or partially and 21% (n = 34) of patients suffered postoperative complications.

Conclusions: NVBGs are a practical, cost-effective and favourable method of war zone management of mandibular defects with success rates comparable to those reported in the civilian literature. However, general trauma principles take precedence to rule out life-threatening injuries. Due consideration of patient factors, surgical factors, and available resources are required in the first-line management of combat-related mandibular defects.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
战争创伤中下颌骨缺损的重建:系统回顾与元分析》。
研究设计系统综述和 Meta 分析:与战斗创伤相关的颌面部损伤呈上升趋势。在颌面复合体中,下颌骨是最有可能在战斗中受损的结构。因此造成的结构性缺损可以通过多种方法进行重建。其中包括血管化骨移植(VBGs)、非血管化骨移植(NVBGs)、异体植入物、重建棒和牵张成骨。本研究旨在确定下颌骨重建在与创伤相关的缺损中的常见方式和疗效:方法:在 Pubmed、Prospero、Dynamed、DARE、EMBASE、COCHRANE 和 BMJ 数据库中进行文献检索:共有六篇文章符合纳入标准,确定了165名需要下颌骨重建的患者。非血管化髂骨移植(137例)是最常见的方法,其次是使用Dacron尿道骨网盘采集回肠嵴骨片(24例)和前顶骨移植(4例)。对六项试验中的五项进行的 Meta 分析表明,总体成功率为 85% (95% CI 79-90;I2 = 59%)。共有13%(22人)的重建完全或部分失败,21%(34人)的患者出现术后并发症:结论:NVBGs是一种实用、经济、有效的战区下颌骨缺损治疗方法,其成功率与民用文献报道的方法相当。然而,一般的创伤原则应优先考虑排除危及生命的损伤。在一线处理与战斗有关的下颌骨缺损时,需要适当考虑患者因素、手术因素和可用资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Reconstruction of Mandible Defects in War Injuries: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Science of the Cover Letter: How to Apply for an Academic Librarian Job Orientation: Laying Out the Welcome Mat (or Not) for New Employees Upgraded and Grounded: Alexandria Library’s Experience in the ALA Pilot Program, Resilient Communities Charting a Course: Volume 66 of Virginia Libraries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1