Comparison of minimally invasive versus conventional open harvesting technique for iliac bone graft in secondary alveolar bone grafting in cleft palate patients: a systematic review.
Bone transplantation
Cleft palate
Grafting
Iliac crest
Journal
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
ISSN: 2234-7550
Titre abrégé: J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101580242
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2019
Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
26
10
2018
revised:
05
01
2019
accepted:
09
01
2019
entrez:
16
11
2019
pubmed:
16
11
2019
medline:
16
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study evaluated and compared the donor site morbidity following minimally invasive and conventional open harvesting of iliac bone for secondary alveolar bone grafting in cleft palate patients. A thorough electronic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and an institutional library and manual search of various journals was done; Inclusion criteria: 1) full-text articles using a minimally invasive or conventional open harvesting technique for iliac bone for secondary alveolar grafting in cleft palate patients and 2) articles published between January 1, 2001 and June 30, 2017 and Exclusion criteria: 1) articles published in languages other than English, 2) case reports, case series, animal studies, in vitro studies, and letters to the editor, and 3) full-text article unavailable even after writing to the authors. Preliminary screening of 274 studies excluded 223 studies for not meeting the eligibility criteria. Of the remaining 51 studies, 19 were removed for being duplicates. Of the remaining 32 studies, 15 were excluded after reading the abstract. Of the 17 studies that were left, 2 were excluded because they were in a language other than English, and 2 were excluded because the study group did not mention cleft palate patients. Thus, 13 studies providing results for a total of 654 patients were included in this qualitative synthesis. Minimally invasive bone graft harvest techniques are better than the conventional open iliac bone harvest method because they offer shorter operative time, decreased requirement for pain medications, less pain on discharge, and a shorter hospital stay.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31728331
doi: 10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.5.241
pmc: PMC6838348
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
241-253Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Références
J Clin Diagn Res. 2013 Nov;7(11):2627-30
pubmed: 24392424
Can J Surg. 2011 Oct;54(5):327-32
pubmed: 21933526
J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Nov;26(8):e744-6
pubmed: 26594994
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Mar;67(3):570-5
pubmed: 19231782
J Craniofac Surg. 2016 May;27(3):598-601
pubmed: 27035602
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005 Feb;43(1):51-6
pubmed: 15620775
J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Oct;26(7):2099-103
pubmed: 26413958
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012 Nov;114(5):586-91
pubmed: 22901642
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Mar;37(3):223-7
pubmed: 18272337
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010 Jan;109(1):52-8
pubmed: 20123379
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Aug;128(2):485-91
pubmed: 21788839
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006 Apr;44(2):129-33
pubmed: 15961201
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008 Jul;45(4):347-52
pubmed: 18616364
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010 Jun;38(4):293-302
pubmed: 19945294
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Dec;46(8):665-70
pubmed: 18760515