经口与颏下技术种植下颌的疗效比较:系统综述

C. Best, B. Best, J. Choi, J. Sykes, Hedyeh Javidnia
{"title":"经口与颏下技术种植下颌的疗效比较:系统综述","authors":"C. Best, B. Best, J. Choi, J. Sykes, Hedyeh Javidnia","doi":"10.1177/07488068221127831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Chin implantation is a commonly performed facial plastic surgery procedure. There are 2 approaches to this procedure: submental and transoral. There is no consensus as to which is the best and safest approach. Objective: The objective of this review is to ascertain the risks and benefits of using an intraoral versus submental approach for chin implantation. Methods: A systematic review of all articles published in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was performed from 1966 to 2020. Results: A total of 1410 articles were reviewed and 38 were chosen for the review based on predetermined selection criteria. Total complication rates in the transoral group ranged from 0% to 14.7%, whereas total complication rates in the submental group ranged from 0% to 15%. No clear difference in the rates of any specific complication was found between the 2 groups. Conclusion: There is no demonstrated difference in complication rates between the 2 approaches to chin implantation. Individual patient assessment and surgeon preference remain the most important determinants of surgical approach.","PeriodicalId":297650,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparisons of Outcomes of Chin Implantation Using the Transoral Versus Submental Technique: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"C. Best, B. Best, J. Choi, J. Sykes, Hedyeh Javidnia\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07488068221127831\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Chin implantation is a commonly performed facial plastic surgery procedure. There are 2 approaches to this procedure: submental and transoral. There is no consensus as to which is the best and safest approach. Objective: The objective of this review is to ascertain the risks and benefits of using an intraoral versus submental approach for chin implantation. Methods: A systematic review of all articles published in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was performed from 1966 to 2020. Results: A total of 1410 articles were reviewed and 38 were chosen for the review based on predetermined selection criteria. Total complication rates in the transoral group ranged from 0% to 14.7%, whereas total complication rates in the submental group ranged from 0% to 15%. No clear difference in the rates of any specific complication was found between the 2 groups. Conclusion: There is no demonstrated difference in complication rates between the 2 approaches to chin implantation. Individual patient assessment and surgeon preference remain the most important determinants of surgical approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":297650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07488068221127831\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07488068221127831","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:下巴种植是一种常见的面部整形手术。有两种方法:颏下和经口。对于哪种方法是最好和最安全的,目前还没有达成共识。目的:本综述的目的是确定采用口内入路与颏下入路进行下巴植入术的风险和益处。方法:对1966年至2020年在MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane Library和Google Scholar上发表的所有文章进行系统回顾。结果:共纳入文献1410篇,按照预定的选择标准筛选出38篇纳入综述。经口组总并发症发生率为0% ~ 14.7%,而颏下组总并发症发生率为0% ~ 15%。两组患者的并发症发生率无明显差异。结论:两种入路的并发症发生率无明显差异。个体患者评估和外科医生的偏好仍然是手术方法的最重要决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparisons of Outcomes of Chin Implantation Using the Transoral Versus Submental Technique: A Systematic Review
Background: Chin implantation is a commonly performed facial plastic surgery procedure. There are 2 approaches to this procedure: submental and transoral. There is no consensus as to which is the best and safest approach. Objective: The objective of this review is to ascertain the risks and benefits of using an intraoral versus submental approach for chin implantation. Methods: A systematic review of all articles published in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was performed from 1966 to 2020. Results: A total of 1410 articles were reviewed and 38 were chosen for the review based on predetermined selection criteria. Total complication rates in the transoral group ranged from 0% to 14.7%, whereas total complication rates in the submental group ranged from 0% to 15%. No clear difference in the rates of any specific complication was found between the 2 groups. Conclusion: There is no demonstrated difference in complication rates between the 2 approaches to chin implantation. Individual patient assessment and surgeon preference remain the most important determinants of surgical approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Periareolar Mastopexy: A Historical Appraisal of Technique and Further Technical Refinements Toward Reliable, Lasting, and Reproducible Results Direct Lip Lift: The Sashimi Technique Indirect Lip Lift With Modified Suspension Technique to Pyriform Ligament In Vitro Analysis of Dissolution of 18 HA-based Dermal Fillers with Tailored Hyaluronidase Dosing to Achieve Urgent Reversal of Vascular Complications Lower Blepharoplasty With Fat Transposition and Three-Vector Suspension Technique
×
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