Anthony D DiPalma, Hasan Zia, Brandon Goodwin, Usmaan Al-Shehab, Anusha Bharadia, Jared Goldfarb
{"title":"可吸收与不可吸收的患者特异性3d打印植入物治疗面部骨折的疗效：系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Anthony D DiPalma, Hasan Zia, Brandon Goodwin, Usmaan Al-Shehab, Anusha Bharadia, Jared Goldfarb","doi":"10.1007/s10006-024-01327-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the efficacy and complication rate of absorbable versus non-absorbable 3D-printed, patient-customized, maxillofacial implants in facial trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) was conducted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and single-proportion meta-analysis was conducted employing PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) yielded a total of 4087 results. After removing duplicates, 16 articles underwent full-text analysis, with 13 meeting the inclusion criteria. The inclusion focused on primary clinical data involving 3D-printed, patient-specific implants for facial bone fracture restorations. Exclusion criteria removed studies without full text, ongoing studies, animal studies, and studies not utilizing CAD/CAM for their implants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 114 patients underwent insertion of 3D-printed implants. Patients receiving non-absorbable implants had a success rate of 84% (95% CI: 74-91), with complications in 12 patients. Patients receiving absorbable implants achieved a 100% success rate (95% CI: 0-100), with zero complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests absorbable 3D-printed implants provide superior results with fewer complications compared to non-absorbable 3D-printed implants for the treatment of facial fractures.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":47251,"journal":{"name":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","volume":"29 1","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of absorbable vs. non-absorbable patient-specific, 3D-printed implants for the treatment of facial bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Anthony D DiPalma, Hasan Zia, Brandon Goodwin, Usmaan Al-Shehab, Anusha Bharadia, Jared Goldfarb\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10006-024-01327-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the efficacy and complication rate of absorbable versus non-absorbable 3D-printed, patient-customized, maxillofacial implants in facial trauma patients.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) was conducted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and single-proportion meta-analysis was conducted employing PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) yielded a total of 4087 results. After removing duplicates, 16 articles underwent full-text analysis, with 13 meeting the inclusion criteria. The inclusion focused on primary clinical data involving 3D-printed, patient-specific implants for facial bone fracture restorations. Exclusion criteria removed studies without full text, ongoing studies, animal studies, and studies not utilizing CAD/CAM for their implants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 114 patients underwent insertion of 3D-printed implants. Patients receiving non-absorbable implants had a success rate of 84% (95% CI: 74-91), with complications in 12 patients. Patients receiving absorbable implants achieved a 100% success rate (95% CI: 0-100), with zero complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study suggests absorbable 3D-printed implants provide superior results with fewer complications compared to non-absorbable 3D-printed implants for the treatment of facial fractures.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47251,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-024-01327-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Heidelberg","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-024-01327-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：本系统综述和荟萃分析比较了可吸收与不可吸收的3d打印患者定制颌面种植体在面部创伤患者中的疗效和并发症发生率。数据来源：综合检索PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane四个数据库。方法：采用PRISMA指南进行系统评价和单比例荟萃分析。对四个数据库（PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane）的全面搜索总共产生了4087个结果。删除重复后，16篇文章进行了全文分析，其中13篇符合纳入标准。纳入的主要临床数据涉及3d打印，患者特异性植入物用于面部骨折修复。排除标准排除了没有全文的研究、正在进行的研究、动物研究和未使用CAD/CAM植入物的研究。结果：114例患者接受了3d打印种植体的植入。接受不可吸收植入物的患者成功率为84% (95% CI: 74-91)， 12例患者出现并发症。接受可吸收植入物的患者获得100%的成功率（95% CI: 0-100），无并发症。结论：与不可吸收的3d打印假体相比，可吸收的3d打印假体治疗面部骨折的效果更好，并发症更少。临床试验号：不适用。
Efficacy of absorbable vs. non-absorbable patient-specific, 3D-printed implants for the treatment of facial bone fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the efficacy and complication rate of absorbable versus non-absorbable 3D-printed, patient-customized, maxillofacial implants in facial trauma patients.
Data sources: A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) was conducted.
Methods: A systematic review and single-proportion meta-analysis was conducted employing PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) yielded a total of 4087 results. After removing duplicates, 16 articles underwent full-text analysis, with 13 meeting the inclusion criteria. The inclusion focused on primary clinical data involving 3D-printed, patient-specific implants for facial bone fracture restorations. Exclusion criteria removed studies without full text, ongoing studies, animal studies, and studies not utilizing CAD/CAM for their implants.
Results: A total of 114 patients underwent insertion of 3D-printed implants. Patients receiving non-absorbable implants had a success rate of 84% (95% CI: 74-91), with complications in 12 patients. Patients receiving absorbable implants achieved a 100% success rate (95% CI: 0-100), with zero complications.
Conclusion: The study suggests absorbable 3D-printed implants provide superior results with fewer complications compared to non-absorbable 3D-printed implants for the treatment of facial fractures.
期刊介绍：
Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery founded as Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie is a peer-reviewed online journal. It is designed for clinicians as well as researchers.The quarterly journal offers comprehensive coverage of new techniques, important developments and innovative ideas in oral and maxillofacial surgery and interdisciplinary aspects of cranial, facial and oral diseases and their management. The journal publishes papers of the highest scientific merit and widest possible scope on work in oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as supporting specialties. Practice-oriented articles help improve the methods used in oral and maxillofacial surgery.Every aspect of oral and maxillofacial surgery is fully covered through a range of invited review articles, clinical and research articles, technical notes, abstracts, and case reports. Specific topics are: aesthetic facial surgery, clinical pathology, computer-assisted surgery, congenital and craniofacial deformities, dentoalveolar surgery, head and neck oncology, implant dentistry, oral medicine, orthognathic surgery, reconstructive surgery, skull base surgery, TMJ and trauma.Time-limited reviewing and electronic processing allow to publish articles as fast as possible. Accepted articles are rapidly accessible online.Clinical studies submitted for publication have to include a declaration that they have been approved by an ethical committee according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki 1964 (last amendment during the 52nd World Medical Association General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000). Experimental animal studies have to be carried out according to the principles of laboratory animal care (NIH publication No 86-23, revised 1985).
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
