眶前与眶后经结膜入路进行孤立性眶壁骨折修补术的并发症:双盲、非劣效、随机、分面对照试验。

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101958
{"title":"眶前与眶后经结膜入路进行孤立性眶壁骨折修补术的并发症:双盲、非劣效、随机、分面对照试验。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Effective surgical access to the orbital floor facilitates surgery and mitigates postoperative complications (PC). The aim of this study was to compare PC between the preseptal and retroseptal transconjunctival approaches (PS-TCA/RS-TCA) for isolated orbital floor fracture (OFF).</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>Using a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, split-face study design, patients aged ≥ 18 years with bilateral isolated OFF were enrolled. A sample size of 177 eyes per group was determined through power analysis. The primary predictor variable was the surgical approach, and the main outcome was the PC rate at month 6. Statistical analyses were computed with a significance level at 0.05 and the non-inferiority margin at a relative risk (RR) of 0.045.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The final sample included 193 patients (23.3 % female; age, 42.8 ± 18.1 years). Both TCA variants exhibited comparable PC rates (5.2 % for PS-TCA vs<em>.</em> 7.3 % for RS-TCA; <em>P</em> = 0.53; absolute risk, +2.07 % [95 % CI, -2.74 % to 6.89 %]; RR, 1.4 [95 % CI, 0.64 to 3.07]). Approximately one in every 49 patients experiencing PC with RS-TCA (number needed to harm, 48.3).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Both TCA methods can be used without different PC rates at 6 months postoperatively. Future research should focus on TCA in combination with other surgical approaches for multiple orbital wall reconstruction.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55993,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":"125 5","pages":"Article 101958"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complications of preseptal versus retroseptal transconjunctival approach for isolated orbital floor fracture repair: A double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, split-face controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jormas.2024.101958\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Effective surgical access to the orbital floor facilitates surgery and mitigates postoperative complications (PC). The aim of this study was to compare PC between the preseptal and retroseptal transconjunctival approaches (PS-TCA/RS-TCA) for isolated orbital floor fracture (OFF).</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>Using a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, split-face study design, patients aged ≥ 18 years with bilateral isolated OFF were enrolled. A sample size of 177 eyes per group was determined through power analysis. The primary predictor variable was the surgical approach, and the main outcome was the PC rate at month 6. Statistical analyses were computed with a significance level at 0.05 and the non-inferiority margin at a relative risk (RR) of 0.045.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The final sample included 193 patients (23.3 % female; age, 42.8 ± 18.1 years). Both TCA variants exhibited comparable PC rates (5.2 % for PS-TCA vs<em>.</em> 7.3 % for RS-TCA; <em>P</em> = 0.53; absolute risk, +2.07 % [95 % CI, -2.74 % to 6.89 %]; RR, 1.4 [95 % CI, 0.64 to 3.07]). Approximately one in every 49 patients experiencing PC with RS-TCA (number needed to harm, 48.3).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Both TCA methods can be used without different PC rates at 6 months postoperatively. Future research should focus on TCA in combination with other surgical approaches for multiple orbital wall reconstruction.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"volume\":\"125 5\",\"pages\":\"Article 101958\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468785524002040\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468785524002040","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:有效的眶底手术入路有助于手术的顺利进行并减少术后并发症(PC)。本研究旨在比较经结膜前路和经结膜后路(PS-TCA/RS-TCA)治疗孤立性眶底骨折(OFF)的PC情况:采用双盲、非劣效、随机、分面研究设计,招募年龄≥ 18 岁的双侧孤立性眶底骨折(OFF)患者。通过功率分析确定每组样本量为 177 只眼睛。统计分析的显著性水平为 0.05,非劣效边际相对风险(RR)为 0.045:最终样本包括 193 名患者(23.3% 为女性;年龄为 42.8±18.1 岁)。两种 TCA 变体的 PC 发生率相当(PS-TCA 为 5.2% vs. RS-TCA 为 7.3%;P = 0.53;绝对风险为 +2.07% [95% CI, -2.74% to 6.89%];RR 为 1.4 [95% CI, 0.64 to 3.07])。大约每 49 名患者中就有一人使用 RS-TCA 进行 PC 治疗(伤害所需人数为 48.3):两种 TCA 方法在术后 6 个月的 PC 发生率并无差异。未来的研究重点应放在 TCA 与其他手术方法相结合的多眶壁重建上。
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
Complications of preseptal versus retroseptal transconjunctival approach for isolated orbital floor fracture repair: A double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, split-face controlled trial

Introduction

Effective surgical access to the orbital floor facilitates surgery and mitigates postoperative complications (PC). The aim of this study was to compare PC between the preseptal and retroseptal transconjunctival approaches (PS-TCA/RS-TCA) for isolated orbital floor fracture (OFF).

Materials and Methods

Using a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomized, split-face study design, patients aged ≥ 18 years with bilateral isolated OFF were enrolled. A sample size of 177 eyes per group was determined through power analysis. The primary predictor variable was the surgical approach, and the main outcome was the PC rate at month 6. Statistical analyses were computed with a significance level at 0.05 and the non-inferiority margin at a relative risk (RR) of 0.045.

Results

The final sample included 193 patients (23.3 % female; age, 42.8 ± 18.1 years). Both TCA variants exhibited comparable PC rates (5.2 % for PS-TCA vs. 7.3 % for RS-TCA; P = 0.53; absolute risk, +2.07 % [95 % CI, -2.74 % to 6.89 %]; RR, 1.4 [95 % CI, 0.64 to 3.07]). Approximately one in every 49 patients experiencing PC with RS-TCA (number needed to harm, 48.3).

Conclusions

Both TCA methods can be used without different PC rates at 6 months postoperatively. Future research should focus on TCA in combination with other surgical approaches for multiple orbital wall reconstruction.
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
Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Surgery, Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine, Otorhinolaryngology and Facial Plastic Surgery
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
23 days
期刊最新文献
Editorial board Contents Is panoramic radiography adequate for diagnosing coronoid process hyperplasia? A case series Vascular complications with necrotic lesions following filler injections: Literature systematic review Traumatic ulcerative granuloma with stromal eosinophilia (TUGSE): Case report of a 63-year-old male patient with a rare self-healing oral mucosal lesion
×
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