科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◆ Journal of stomatology, oral and maxillofacial surgery2026-08-29

What are the local surgical adjuncts to enhance paranasal augmentation in Le Fort 1 osteotomies? A Systematic Review.

Celestine Yu Qing Teo, Shili Ng, Cheryl Ker Jia Lee, Chee Weng Yong

一句话结论 · In one sentence

All four types of surgical adjuncts demonstrated clinical benefit based on subjective outcome assessments. However, given the predominance of low=level evidence, firm conclusions regarding efficacy cannot be drawn. When compared, subgroup 1 showed the best evidence whereas subgroup 4 showed the least. Subgroup 2 lacked evidence in stability while subgroup 3 showed limited amount of paranasal augmentation.

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Adjunctive surgical procedures may be performed simultaneously with Le Fort I osteotomy (LF1) to ensure adequate paranasal augmentation. AIMS: The objective of this systematic review is to integrate current knowledge on concurrent local surgical methods to supplement LF1 to enhance paranasal volume. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies involving 463 patients were reviewed. Four subgroups of local surgical adjuncts were identified. Subgroup 1 (9 studies, 245 patients) consisted of high and quadrangular Le Fort I modifications. This subgroup had the most robust evidence in terms of paranasal volume augmentation and stability. Subgroup 2 (6 studies, 83 patients) consisted of pedicled buccal fat pad (BFP) and free intra-oral autogenous bone block grafts. While the two types of grafts were shown to be useful in paranasal augmentation, there are insufficient long-term studies to demonstrate their stability. The third subgroup (4 studies, 103 patients) had no reported complications and showed good stability, but the amount of augmentation was modest. The last subgroup (3 studies, 32 patients) had the weakest degree of evidence. CONCLUSION: All four types of surgical adjuncts demonstrated clinical benefit based on subjective outcome assessments. However, given the predominance of low=level evidence, firm conclusions regarding efficacy cannot be drawn. When compared, subgroup 1 showed the best evidence whereas subgroup 4 showed the least. Subgroup 2 lacked evidence in stability while subgroup 3 showed limited amount of paranasal augmentation.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

What are the local surgical adjuncts to enhance paranasal augmentation in Le Fort 1 osteotomies? A Systematic Review. — 科研速览 Science Skim