Head & neck · 2021
What is the best method for prevention of postparotidectomy Frey syndrome? Network meta-analysis.
СтатьяОбзорNetwork Meta-AnalysisНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Mashrah Mubarak Ahmed, Aldhohrah Taghrid, Abdelrehem Ahmed, Koraitim Mohamed, Wang Liping
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Prevention of Frey syndrome (FS) after parotidectomy using an interposition barrier has long been gaining a wide popularity; however, there is no clear evidence regarding which preventive technique is more effective. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to answer the question: What is the best method for prevention of FS after parotidectomy?
METHODS: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library was conducted to identify the eligible studies. The outcome was the incidence of subjective Frey syndrome (SFS) and objective Frey syndrome (OFS). The Bayesian NMA accompanied with a random effects model and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated using GeMTC R package.
RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (n = 2987 patients) with five interventions, namely Alloderm (ADM), temporoparietal fascia (TPF), sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM), superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS), and free fat graft (FFG), were compared together and with no interposition barrier (NB). The results of NMA showed a statistically significant reduction in both SFS and OFS when ADM, TPF, SMAS, FFG, and SCM were compared with NB. No statistical differences were observed when comparing ADM, SCM, SMAS, FFG, and TPF. TPF ranked the best of all treatments (59.4%) and was associated with the least incidence of SFS; whereas ADM ranked the best of all treatments (61.1%) and was associated with the least incidence of OFS.
CONCLUSIONS: All interventions (TPF flap, ADM, FFG, SMAS, and SCM) were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of FS when compared with NB. TPF and ADM showed the best outcome with the least incidence of SFS and OFS, respectively.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library was conducted to identify the eligible studies. The outcome was the incidence of subjective Frey syndrome (SFS) and objective Frey syndrome (OFS). The Bayesian NMA accompanied with a random effects model and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated using GeMTC R package.
RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (n = 2987 patients) with five interventions, namely Alloderm (ADM), temporoparietal fascia (TPF), sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM), superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS), and free fat graft (FFG), were compared together and with no interposition barrier (NB). The results of NMA showed a statistically significant reduction in both SFS and OFS when ADM, TPF, SMAS, FFG, and SCM were compared with NB. No statistical differences were observed when comparing ADM, SCM, SMAS, FFG, and TPF. TPF ranked the best of all treatments (59.4%) and was associated with the least incidence of SFS; whereas ADM ranked the best of all treatments (61.1%) and was associated with the least incidence of OFS.
CONCLUSIONS: All interventions (TPF flap, ADM, FFG, SMAS, and SCM) were associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of FS when compared with NB. TPF and ADM showed the best outcome with the least incidence of SFS and OFS, respectively.