Meta-analysis of poly-<i>L</i>-lactide material treatment for mandibular fractures _West China Medical Journal

Authors：

YI Pinshi ^1,1 ,  QIU Lihua ^2,2 , HU Chengchen ^3,3 , REN Wei ^3,3

1. Chongqing Key Laboratory for Oral Diseases and Biomedical Sciences, Chongqing 401120, P. R. China;
2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Stomatological Hospital Affiliated to Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 401120, P. R. China;
3. Key Laboratory of Stomatology and Biomedical Engineering in Colleges and Universities of Chongqing, Chongqing 401120, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

QIU Lihua, Email: gqyidi2001@163.com

Keywords：

Bioabsorbable material; Poly-L-lactide; Mandibular fractures; Titanium plate; Meta-analysis

DOI：

10.7507/1002-0179.201703046

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To systematically review the efficacy of poly-L-lactide (PLLA) material treatment versus titanium plates treatment for mandibular fractures. Methods We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database to collect literatures about randomized or non-randomized controlled trials using PLLA treatment (the trial group) versus titanium plates treatment (the control group) for mandibular fractures in the last ten years (from January 2007 to March 2017). The quality evaluation and data extraction were carried out by 2 reviewers independently and analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software. Results A total of 8 literatures including 453 patients with mandibular fractures were included in this Meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in total complications between the two groups [odds ratio (OR)=0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.55, 1.75), P=0.95], including dislocation healing [OR= 0.96, 95%CI (0.46, 2.01), P=0.90], occlusal disturbance [OR=1.53, 95%CI (0.61, 3.87), P=0.37], infection [OR=0.63, 95%CI (0.23, 1.74), P=0.37], and secondary operation [OR=0.46, 95%CI (0.17, 1.27), P=0.14]. Conclusion There is no significant difference between PLLA and titanium plate in the treatment of mandibular fractures.

Citation： YI Pinshi, QIU Lihua, HU Chengchen, REN Wei. Meta-analysis of poly-L-lactide material treatment for mandibular fractures . West China Medical Journal, 2017, 32(10): 1499-1504. doi: 10.7507/1002-0179.201703046 Copy

1.	何黎升, 陈杰. 下颌骨骨折的治疗. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2010, 3(4): 203-206.
2.	杨学文, 东耀峻, 李祖兵, 等. 坚固内固定技术在口腔颌面外科的应用. 口腔医学纵横杂志, 1999, 15(1): 31-33.
3.	Agarwal S, Gupta A, Grevious M, et al. Use of resorbable implants for mandibular fixation: a systematic review. J Craniofac Surg, 2009, 20(2): 331-339.
4.	林华维, 刘强. 可吸收内固定材料在颌面外科的应用. 口腔医学, 2015, 35(11): 986-989.
5.	王立, 金大地, 朴仲贤. 生物可吸收高强度左旋聚丙交酯材料在体内的力学特征. 医用生物力学, 2011, 16(3): 135-138.
6.	廖凯荣, 全大萍, 赵剑豪, 等. 低左旋度聚丙交酯的分子结构及体外降解行为研究. 功能高分子学报, 2013(16): 187-202.
7.	Laughlin RM, Block MS, Wilk R, et al. Resorbable plates for the fixation of mandibular fractures: a prospective study. Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2007, 65(1): 89-96.
8.	Yang L, Xu M, Jin X, et al. Skeletal stability of bioresorbable fixation in orthognathic surgery: a systemic review. J Cranio- maxillofac Surg, 2014, 42(5): e176-e181.
9.	Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2011(2): S38.
10.	Leno MB, Liu SY, Chen CT, et al. Comparison of functional outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction between titanium and absorbable plates and screws for fixation of mandibular fractures: a one-year prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2017, 45(5): 704-709.
11.	Sedhain BP, Jia YL. Comparison of biodegradable and titanium screw plates in mandible fracture. J Nepal Dental Assoc, 2013, 13(2): 54-61.
12.	Sukegawa S, Kanno T, Nagano D, et al. The clinical feasibility of newly developed thin flat-type bioresorbable osteosynthesis devices for the internal fixation of zygomatic fractures: is there a difference in healing between bioresorbable materials and titanium osteosynthesis?. J Craniofac Surg, 2016, 27(8): 2124-2129.
13.	Taylan FG, Akan M. Dilemma in pediatric mandible fractures: resorbable or metallic plates? Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 2015, 21(6): 509-513.
14.	卢军, 冯兴梅, 徐克, 等. 聚左旋丙交酯可吸收材料在下颌骨骨折中的临床应用. 中国现代医学杂志, 2011, 21(32): 4046-4091.
15.	吕继连, 张瑞, 闫大勇, 等. 可吸收材料在儿童下颌骨骨折中的应用. 医药论坛杂志, 2016, 37(2): 67-69.
16.	徐泽群. 可吸收内固定板治疗颌骨骨折的临床疗效观察. 口腔医学, 2014, 34(9): 716-718.
17.	邱勋定. 生物可吸收性微型接骨板与微型钛内固定系统对下颌骨骨折稳定性的影响. 中国组织工程研究, 2015, 19(38): 6155-6160.
18.	郑永红, 张益, 孙勇刚, 等. 颌骨骨折坚强内固定术后取钛板原因分析. 口腔颌面外科杂志, 2001, 11(1): 72-74.

1. 何黎升, 陈杰. 下颌骨骨折的治疗. 中国实用口腔科杂志, 2010, 3(4): 203-206.
2. 杨学文, 东耀峻, 李祖兵, 等. 坚固内固定技术在口腔颌面外科的应用. 口腔医学纵横杂志, 1999, 15(1): 31-33.
3. Agarwal S, Gupta A, Grevious M, et al. Use of resorbable implants for mandibular fixation: a systematic review. J Craniofac Surg, 2009, 20(2): 331-339.
4. 林华维, 刘强. 可吸收内固定材料在颌面外科的应用. 口腔医学, 2015, 35(11): 986-989.
5. 王立, 金大地, 朴仲贤. 生物可吸收高强度左旋聚丙交酯材料在体内的力学特征. 医用生物力学, 2011, 16(3): 135-138.
6. 廖凯荣, 全大萍, 赵剑豪, 等. 低左旋度聚丙交酯的分子结构及体外降解行为研究. 功能高分子学报, 2013(16): 187-202.
7. Laughlin RM, Block MS, Wilk R, et al. Resorbable plates for the fixation of mandibular fractures: a prospective study. Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2007, 65(1): 89-96.
8. Yang L, Xu M, Jin X, et al. Skeletal stability of bioresorbable fixation in orthognathic surgery: a systemic review. J Cranio- maxillofac Surg, 2014, 42(5): e176-e181.
9. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2011(2): S38.
10. Leno MB, Liu SY, Chen CT, et al. Comparison of functional outcomes and patient-reported satisfaction between titanium and absorbable plates and screws for fixation of mandibular fractures: a one-year prospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2017, 45(5): 704-709.
11. Sedhain BP, Jia YL. Comparison of biodegradable and titanium screw plates in mandible fracture. J Nepal Dental Assoc, 2013, 13(2): 54-61.
12. Sukegawa S, Kanno T, Nagano D, et al. The clinical feasibility of newly developed thin flat-type bioresorbable osteosynthesis devices for the internal fixation of zygomatic fractures: is there a difference in healing between bioresorbable materials and titanium osteosynthesis?. J Craniofac Surg, 2016, 27(8): 2124-2129.
13. Taylan FG, Akan M. Dilemma in pediatric mandible fractures: resorbable or metallic plates? Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 2015, 21(6): 509-513.
14. 卢军, 冯兴梅, 徐克, 等. 聚左旋丙交酯可吸收材料在下颌骨骨折中的临床应用. 中国现代医学杂志, 2011, 21(32): 4046-4091.
15. 吕继连, 张瑞, 闫大勇, 等. 可吸收材料在儿童下颌骨骨折中的应用. 医药论坛杂志, 2016, 37(2): 67-69.
16. 徐泽群. 可吸收内固定板治疗颌骨骨折的临床疗效观察. 口腔医学, 2014, 34(9): 716-718.
17. 邱勋定. 生物可吸收性微型接骨板与微型钛内固定系统对下颌骨骨折稳定性的影响. 中国组织工程研究, 2015, 19(38): 6155-6160.
18. 郑永红, 张益, 孙勇刚, 等. 颌骨骨折坚强内固定术后取钛板原因分析. 口腔颌面外科杂志, 2001, 11(1): 72-74.

Previous Article
Topical administration of tranexamic acid in total hip arthroplasty: a Meta-analysis
Next Article
Clinical observation of the surgical treatment for 30 patients with discogenic low back pain

West China Medical Journal

Meta-analysis of poly-L-lactide material treatment for mandibular fractures

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content