Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis vs. Tracheostomy in the Management of Pierre Robin Sequence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q2 Dentistry
Indri Lakhsmi Putri, Kusuma Islami, Imaniar Fitri Aisyah, Rachmaniar Pramanasari, Citrawati Dyah Kencono Wungu
{"title":"Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis vs. Tracheostomy in the Management of Pierre Robin Sequence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Indri Lakhsmi Putri, Kusuma Islami, Imaniar Fitri Aisyah, Rachmaniar Pramanasari, Citrawati Dyah Kencono Wungu","doi":"10.1177/10556656241311549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compares mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO) and tracheostomy in managing severe airway obstruction in patients with the Pierre Robin sequence (PRS).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines was performed. Literature searches were conducted across PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus, E.B.S.C.O., and Web of Science, including grey literature, covering studies until May 30, 2024. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>patients with Pierre Robin Sequence.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO) and tracheostomy.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcomes included airway management (tracheostomy avoidance for MDO, decannulation for tracheostomy) and feeding outcomes (G-tube placement). Secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and associated costs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies were included. MDO and the MDO-first approach demonstrated significantly better airway outcomes (OR = 10.72, 95% CI = 1.97-58.44, p = 0.006; OR = 4.51, 95% CI = 2.61-7.79, p < 0.00001). MDO also reduced the need for G-tube placement (OR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.04-0.18, p < 0.00001) and lowered hospital costs (MD = -47.90 thousand USD, 95% CI = -59.93 to -35.87, p < 0.0001). A shorter hospital stay was observed but was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MDO offers better airway outcomes, lower G-tube placement rates, and reduced costs, making it a preferred option. Larger studies within the same syndromic status are needed to minimize confounding factors and validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":49220,"journal":{"name":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","volume":" ","pages":"10556656241311549"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656241311549","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study compares mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO) and tracheostomy in managing severe airway obstruction in patients with the Pierre Robin sequence (PRS).

Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines was performed. Literature searches were conducted across PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus, E.B.S.C.O., and Web of Science, including grey literature, covering studies until May 30, 2024. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Patients: patients with Pierre Robin Sequence.

Interventions: Mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO) and tracheostomy.

Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes included airway management (tracheostomy avoidance for MDO, decannulation for tracheostomy) and feeding outcomes (G-tube placement). Secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and associated costs.

Results: Thirteen studies were included. MDO and the MDO-first approach demonstrated significantly better airway outcomes (OR = 10.72, 95% CI = 1.97-58.44, p = 0.006; OR = 4.51, 95% CI = 2.61-7.79, p < 0.00001). MDO also reduced the need for G-tube placement (OR = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.04-0.18, p < 0.00001) and lowered hospital costs (MD = -47.90 thousand USD, 95% CI = -59.93 to -35.87, p < 0.0001). A shorter hospital stay was observed but was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: MDO offers better airway outcomes, lower G-tube placement rates, and reduced costs, making it a preferred option. Larger studies within the same syndromic status are needed to minimize confounding factors and validate these findings.

下颌骨牵张成骨vs气管切开术在Pierre Robin序列管理:系统回顾和meta分析。
目的:比较下颌骨牵张成骨术(MDO)和气管造口术(PRS)治疗严重气道阻塞患者的疗效。设计:遵循PRISMA指南进行系统评价和荟萃分析。通过PubMed、ScienceDirect、Cochrane Library、Scopus、E.B.S.C.O和Web of Science进行文献检索,包括灰色文献,涵盖了截至2024年5月30日的研究。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估研究质量。患者:皮埃尔·罗宾序列患者。干预:下颌牵张成骨术(MDO)和气管切开术。主要结局指标:主要结局包括气道管理(气管切开术避免MDO,气管切开术脱管)和喂养结局(g管放置)。次要结局是住院时间和相关费用。结果:纳入13项研究。MDO和MDO-first入路表现出更好的气道预后(OR = 10.72, 95% CI = 1.97-58.44, p = 0.006;OR = 4.51, 95% CI = 2.61-7.79, p结论:MDO具有更好的气道预后、更低的g管置入率和更低的成本,使其成为首选。需要在相同的综合征状态下进行更大规模的研究,以尽量减少混杂因素并验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
36.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (CPCJ) is the premiere peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to current research on etiology, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in all areas pertaining to craniofacial anomalies. CPCJ reports on basic science and clinical research aimed at better elucidating the pathogenesis, pathology, and optimal methods of treatment of cleft and craniofacial anomalies. The journal strives to foster communication and cooperation among professionals from all specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信