Literature DB >> 36107287

Is it necessary to use bone grafts to prevent defects at the lower border of the mandible after mandibular advancement?-a systematic review.

Pedro Henrique da Hora Sales1, Francesco Maffìa2, Valentino Vellone3, Valerio Ramieri4, Jair Carneiro Leão5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Defects in the lower border of the mandible may represent an aesthetic problem after mandibular advancement in orthognathic surgery. The use of bone grafts has been reported in the literature as a possibility to reduce these defects in the postoperative period.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review is to answer the following research question: Is it necessary to use bone grafts to prevent defects at the lower border of the mandible after mandibular advancement?
METHODS: The literature search was conducted on MEDLINE via PubMed, Scopus, Central Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, and Sigle via Open Gray up until December 2020. Five studies were eligible for this systematic review, considering the previously established inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS: 1340 mandibular osteotomies were evaluated, with a mean advance of 8 mm, being 510 with bone graft (42 defects), 528 without graft (329 defects), and 302 with an alternative technique (32 defects). Regarding the type of bone graft used, three articles used xenogenous or biomaterial grafts and two allogenous bone grafts. The results of the meta-analysis showed a reduction in the presence of defects in the bone graft group: OR 0.04, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.19; p = 0.0005, (I2 = 87%; p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: The use of bone grafts seems promising in reducing defects in the lower border of the mandible after mandibular advancement. New controlled prospective studies with a larger number of participants are needed to ensure the effectiveness of this procedure.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone transplantation; Mandible; Orthognathic surgery; Sagittal split osteotomy

Year:  2022        PMID: 36107287     DOI: 10.1007/s10006-022-01112-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 1865-1550


  8 in total

1.  How to Prevent Mandibular Lower Border Notching After Bilateral Sagittal Split Osteotomies for Major Advancements: Analysis of 168 Osteotomies.

Authors:  Mirco Raffaini; Alice S Magri; Veronica Giuntini; Michele Nieri; Clarissa Pantani; Marco Conti
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  Complications in Orthognathic Surgery.

Authors:  Sergio Olate; Eder Sigua; Luciana Asprino; Márcio de Moraes
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.046

3.  Bone grafting in orthognathic surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  A Alyahya; G R J Swennen
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 2.789

4.  Occurrence of a 'bad' split and success of initial mandibular healing: a review of 524 sagittal ramus osteotomies in 262 patients.

Authors:  J C Posnick; E Choi; S Liu
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 2.789

5.  Modifications in the sagittal osteotomy of the mandible.

Authors:  B N Epker
Journal:  J Oral Surg       Date:  1977-02

6.  A modified intraoral sagittal splitting technic for correction of mandibular prognathism.

Authors:  E E Hunsuck
Journal:  J Oral Surg       Date:  1968-04

7.  Grafting of large mandibular advancement with a collagen-coated bovine bone (Bio-Oss Collagen) in orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  Lorenzo Trevisiol; Pier Francesco Nocini; Massimo Albanese; Andrea Sbarbati; Antonio D'Agostino
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.046

8.  Osteotomy Site Grafting in Bilateral Sagittal Split Surgery With Bioactive Glass S53P4 for Skeletal Stability.

Authors:  Patricia Stoor; Satu Apajalahti
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.046

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.