M Ureel, S Corthals, R Coopman, Hubert Vermeersch, N Brusselaers
{"title":"面部假体植入失败:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"M Ureel, S Corthals, R Coopman, Hubert Vermeersch, N Brusselaers","doi":"10.1016/j.ijom.2025.03.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate craniofacial implant failure in the auricular, orbital, and nasal regions, including the impact of radiotherapy and evaluation of early (<1 year) and late (>1 year) implant failure. Five electronic databases were searched for articles reporting studies on implant failure in auricular, nasal, and/or orbital prostheses. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Sixteen studies (3630 implants in 1127 patients) were included. The pooled implant failure rate was 3.5% in the auricular region, 18.7% in the orbital region, and 8.8% in the nasal region. Compared to the auricular region, implants inserted in the orbital (risk ratio (RR) 4.54) and nasal (RR 3.00) regions had a significantly higher risk of failure. Auricular (RR 2.17) and orbital (RR 2.07) implants had an increased risk of failure in irradiated bone. Regarding early failure (<1 year), 79.8% of nasal implants that failed were found to fail early, compared to 21.4% and 35.4% of failed auricular and orbital implants, respectively. This meta-analysis is novel in studying the timing of implant failure. Future studies should cover long observation periods and adequately report failure rates. There is a lack of high-quality studies and well-defined standardized outcome parameters. Results should be interpreted with caution due to low levels of evidence. DATA AVAILABILITY: This review has been registered with the Open Science Framework (doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/EBUC4). The study protocol and data files are publicly accessible.</p>","PeriodicalId":94053,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implant failure of facial prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"M Ureel, S Corthals, R Coopman, Hubert Vermeersch, N Brusselaers\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijom.2025.03.016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate craniofacial implant failure in the auricular, orbital, and nasal regions, including the impact of radiotherapy and evaluation of early (<1 year) and late (>1 year) implant failure. Five electronic databases were searched for articles reporting studies on implant failure in auricular, nasal, and/or orbital prostheses. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Sixteen studies (3630 implants in 1127 patients) were included. The pooled implant failure rate was 3.5% in the auricular region, 18.7% in the orbital region, and 8.8% in the nasal region. Compared to the auricular region, implants inserted in the orbital (risk ratio (RR) 4.54) and nasal (RR 3.00) regions had a significantly higher risk of failure. Auricular (RR 2.17) and orbital (RR 2.07) implants had an increased risk of failure in irradiated bone. Regarding early failure (<1 year), 79.8% of nasal implants that failed were found to fail early, compared to 21.4% and 35.4% of failed auricular and orbital implants, respectively. This meta-analysis is novel in studying the timing of implant failure. Future studies should cover long observation periods and adequately report failure rates. There is a lack of high-quality studies and well-defined standardized outcome parameters. Results should be interpreted with caution due to low levels of evidence. DATA AVAILABILITY: This review has been registered with the Open Science Framework (doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/EBUC4). The study protocol and data files are publicly accessible.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94053,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2025.03.016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2025.03.016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Implant failure of facial prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis.
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate craniofacial implant failure in the auricular, orbital, and nasal regions, including the impact of radiotherapy and evaluation of early (<1 year) and late (>1 year) implant failure. Five electronic databases were searched for articles reporting studies on implant failure in auricular, nasal, and/or orbital prostheses. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Sixteen studies (3630 implants in 1127 patients) were included. The pooled implant failure rate was 3.5% in the auricular region, 18.7% in the orbital region, and 8.8% in the nasal region. Compared to the auricular region, implants inserted in the orbital (risk ratio (RR) 4.54) and nasal (RR 3.00) regions had a significantly higher risk of failure. Auricular (RR 2.17) and orbital (RR 2.07) implants had an increased risk of failure in irradiated bone. Regarding early failure (<1 year), 79.8% of nasal implants that failed were found to fail early, compared to 21.4% and 35.4% of failed auricular and orbital implants, respectively. This meta-analysis is novel in studying the timing of implant failure. Future studies should cover long observation periods and adequately report failure rates. There is a lack of high-quality studies and well-defined standardized outcome parameters. Results should be interpreted with caution due to low levels of evidence. DATA AVAILABILITY: This review has been registered with the Open Science Framework (doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/EBUC4). The study protocol and data files are publicly accessible.