Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Does the Surgery-First Approach Produce Better Outcomes in Orthognathic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017; Elsevier BV; Volume: 75; Issue: 11 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/j.joms.2017.06.002

1531-5053

Le Yang, Yudong Xiao, Yujie Liang, Xi Wang, Jingyuan Li, Guiqing Liao,

Dental Radiography and Imaging

Purpose The surgery-first approach (SFA) in orthognathic surgery, performed without presurgical orthodontic treatment, has gained attention, but the results remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess the current evidence on stability, efficacy, and surgical results of SFA versus conventional 3-stage method (CTM) orthognathic surgery. Materials and Methods A comprehensive search in PubMed and Web of Science was conducted. A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of all comparative studies were performed to assess the 2 strategies (SFA and CTM) using a random- or a fixed-effects model. Outcomes included treatment duration, postoperative stability, surgical movement, and postoperative occlusion. Results Ten nonrandomized controlled studies including 513 patients were identified. Compared with CTM, patients in the SFA group benefited from shorter total treatment duration (weighted mean difference [WMD], −5.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], −8.21 to −2.29; P = .0005), similar postoperative stability of the mandible (WMD, 0.35 mm; 95% CI, −0.24 to 0.94; P = .55) and maxilla (WMD, 0.13 mm; 95% CI, −0.35 to 0.60; P = .60), similar surgical movements, and other surgical results. Conclusions SFA offers an efficient alternative to CTM with shorter total treatment duration, similar postoperative stability, and other surgical results but longer postoperative orthodontic time. The surgery-first approach (SFA) in orthognathic surgery, performed without presurgical orthodontic treatment, has gained attention, but the results remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to assess the current evidence on stability, efficacy, and surgical results of SFA versus conventional 3-stage method (CTM) orthognathic surgery. A comprehensive search in PubMed and Web of Science was conducted. A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of all comparative studies were performed to assess the 2 strategies (SFA and CTM) using a random- or a fixed-effects model. Outcomes included treatment duration, postoperative stability, surgical movement, and postoperative occlusion. Ten nonrandomized controlled studies including 513 patients were identified. Compared with CTM, patients in the SFA group benefited from shorter total treatment duration (weighted mean difference [WMD], −5.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], −8.21 to −2.29; P = .0005), similar postoperative stability of the mandible (WMD, 0.35 mm; 95% CI, −0.24 to 0.94; P = .55) and maxilla (WMD, 0.13 mm; 95% CI, −0.35 to 0.60; P = .60), similar surgical movements, and other surgical results. SFA offers an efficient alternative to CTM with shorter total treatment duration, similar postoperative stability, and other surgical results but longer postoperative orthodontic time.