Dento maxillo facial radiology · 2018
Three-dimensional radiological evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting in cleft lip and palate patients: a systematic review.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Mulder Dries, Cadenas de Llano-Pérula Maria, Jacobs Reinhilde, Verdonck Anna, Willems Guy
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the existing literature on the three-dimensional (3D) radiological evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients, with specific interest in 3D imaging protocols and assessment methods.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Included publications concerned 3D imaging for evaluation of SABG in CLP patients while articles about primary or tertiary bone grafting or using of two-dimensional images only were excluded. Study quality was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies or the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias.
RESULTS: The search yielded 1735 citations, of which 38 met the inclusion criteria. We noticed a large variability in imaging protocols and bone graft evaluation methods between studies. Most articles were observational studies with medium to low methodological quality, except for the one randomised clinical trial having a low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of prospective, controlled trials based on a consistent imaging protocol with a sufficiently long follow-up period. A pressing need exists for the development of a consistent optimized imaging protocol for diagnosis and follow up of SABG in CLP patients. Although 3D evaluation methods seem to be more precise than two-dimensional methods, we should be careful when comparing the outcomes arising from different 3D measuring techniques.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Included publications concerned 3D imaging for evaluation of SABG in CLP patients while articles about primary or tertiary bone grafting or using of two-dimensional images only were excluded. Study quality was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies or the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias.
RESULTS: The search yielded 1735 citations, of which 38 met the inclusion criteria. We noticed a large variability in imaging protocols and bone graft evaluation methods between studies. Most articles were observational studies with medium to low methodological quality, except for the one randomised clinical trial having a low risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of prospective, controlled trials based on a consistent imaging protocol with a sufficiently long follow-up period. A pressing need exists for the development of a consistent optimized imaging protocol for diagnosis and follow up of SABG in CLP patients. Although 3D evaluation methods seem to be more precise than two-dimensional methods, we should be careful when comparing the outcomes arising from different 3D measuring techniques.