Meta-Analysis of Open vs Closed Surgery of Mandibular Condyle Fractures
A review of the literature reveals a difference of opinion regarding whether open or closed reduction of condylar fractures produces the best results. It would be beneficial to critically analyze past studies that have directly compared the two methods in an attempt to answer this question. A Medl...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Others |
| Published: |
VCU Scholars Compass
2006
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/1397 http://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2396&context=etd |
| Summary: | A review of the literature reveals a difference of opinion regarding whether open or closed reduction of condylar fractures produces the best results. It would be beneficial to critically analyze past studies that have directly compared the two methods in an attempt to answer this question. A Medline search for articles using the key words 'mandibular condyle fractures' and 'mandibular condyle fractures surgery' was performed. The articles chosen for the meta-analysis contained data on at least one of the following: postoperative maximum mouth opening, lateral excursion, protrusion, deviation on opening, asymmetry, and joint pain or muscle pain. Several common statistical methods were used to test for differences between open and closed surgery, including the weighted average method for fixed and random effects as well as the Mantel-Haenszel method for fixed effects. Some of the outcome variables were found to be statistically significant but were interpreted with caution because of the poor quality of the studies assessed. There is a need for more standardized data collection as well as patient randomization to treatment groups. |
|---|