-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Donor nerve selection in free gracilis muscle transfer for facial reanimation. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes
KC. Bayezid, M. Joukal, E. Karabulut, J. Macek, L. Moravcová, L. Streit
Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko
Typ dokumentu metaanalýza, systematický přehled, časopisecké články, přehledy
- MeSH
- faciální paralýza * chirurgie MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- musculus gracilis * transplantace MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- usmívání se fyziologie MeSH
- výraz obličeje MeSH
- zákroky plastické chirurgie * MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- metaanalýza MeSH
- přehledy MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
BACKGROUND: One of the critical factors in facial reanimation is selecting the donor nerve. The most favored neurotizers are the contralateral facial nerve with a cross-face nerve graft (CFNG) and motor nerve to the masseter (MNM). A relatively new dual innervation (DI) method has shown successful results. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of different neurotization strategies for free gracilis muscle transfer (FGMT). METHODS: The Scopus and WoS databases were queried with 21 keywords. Three-stage article selection was performed for the systematic review. Articles presenting quantitative data for commissure excursion and facial symmetry were included in meta-analysis, using random-effects model. ROBINS-I tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess bias and study quality. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven articles containing FGMT were systematically reviewed. Most studies indicated CFNG as the first choice. MNM was primarily indicated in bilateral palsy and in elderly. Clinical outcomes of DI studies were promising. 13 studies including 435 observations (179 CFNG, 182 MNM, 74 DI) were eligible for meta-analysis. The mean change in commissure excursion was 7.15 mm (95% CI: 4.57-9.72) for CFNG, 8.46 mm (95% CI: 6.86-10.06) for MNM, and 5.18 mm (95% CI: 4.01-6.34) for DI. In pairwise comparisons, a significant difference was found between MNM and DI (p = 0.0011), despite the superior outcomes described in DI studies. No statistically significant difference was found in resting and smile symmetry (p = 0.625, p = 0.780). CONCLUSIONS: CFNG is the most preferred neurotizer, and MNM is a reliable second option. Outcomes of DI studies are promising, but more comparison studies are needed to draw conclusions. Our meta-analysis was limited by incompatibility of the assessment scales. Consensus on a standardized assessment system would add value to future studies.
Department of Anatomy Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic
Department of Biostatistics Faculty of Medicine Hacettepe University Ankara Turkey
Masaryk University Campus Library Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23010900
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230801132701.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 230718s2023 ne f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.014 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)37148809
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a ne
- 100 1_
- $a Bayezid, K Can $u Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Donor nerve selection in free gracilis muscle transfer for facial reanimation. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes / $c KC. Bayezid, M. Joukal, E. Karabulut, J. Macek, L. Moravcová, L. Streit
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: One of the critical factors in facial reanimation is selecting the donor nerve. The most favored neurotizers are the contralateral facial nerve with a cross-face nerve graft (CFNG) and motor nerve to the masseter (MNM). A relatively new dual innervation (DI) method has shown successful results. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of different neurotization strategies for free gracilis muscle transfer (FGMT). METHODS: The Scopus and WoS databases were queried with 21 keywords. Three-stage article selection was performed for the systematic review. Articles presenting quantitative data for commissure excursion and facial symmetry were included in meta-analysis, using random-effects model. ROBINS-I tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess bias and study quality. RESULTS: One hundred forty-seven articles containing FGMT were systematically reviewed. Most studies indicated CFNG as the first choice. MNM was primarily indicated in bilateral palsy and in elderly. Clinical outcomes of DI studies were promising. 13 studies including 435 observations (179 CFNG, 182 MNM, 74 DI) were eligible for meta-analysis. The mean change in commissure excursion was 7.15 mm (95% CI: 4.57-9.72) for CFNG, 8.46 mm (95% CI: 6.86-10.06) for MNM, and 5.18 mm (95% CI: 4.01-6.34) for DI. In pairwise comparisons, a significant difference was found between MNM and DI (p = 0.0011), despite the superior outcomes described in DI studies. No statistically significant difference was found in resting and smile symmetry (p = 0.625, p = 0.780). CONCLUSIONS: CFNG is the most preferred neurotizer, and MNM is a reliable second option. Outcomes of DI studies are promising, but more comparison studies are needed to draw conclusions. Our meta-analysis was limited by incompatibility of the assessment scales. Consensus on a standardized assessment system would add value to future studies.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 12
- $a musculus gracilis $x transplantace $7 D000071976
- 650 12
- $a zákroky plastické chirurgie $7 D019651
- 650 12
- $a faciální paralýza $x chirurgie $7 D005158
- 650 _2
- $a usmívání se $x fyziologie $7 D012904
- 650 _2
- $a výraz obličeje $7 D005149
- 655 _2
- $a metaanalýza $7 D017418
- 655 _2
- $a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a přehledy $7 D016454
- 700 1_
- $a Joukal, Marek $u Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Karabulut, Erdem $u Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
- 700 1_
- $a Macek, Jan $u Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Moravcová, Ludmila $u Masaryk University Campus Library, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Streit, Libor $u Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno and Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. Electronic address: libor.streit@med.muni.cz
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008968 $t Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS $x 1878-0539 $g Roč. 82, č. - (2023), s. 31-47
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37148809 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20230718 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230801132657 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1963361 $s 1197165
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 82 $c - $d 31-47 $e 20230418 $i 1878-0539 $m Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery $n J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg $x MED00008968
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20230718
