Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery 2023-01, Vol.52 (1), p.88-97 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 97 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 88 |
| container_title | International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery |
| container_volume | 52 |
| creator | Niezen, E.T. van Minnen, B. Bos, R.R.M. Dijkstra, P.U. |
| description | The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9–2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1–16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.014 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2681049044</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0901502722002272</els_id><sourcerecordid>2681049044</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-38f2002d6b39d3078d5d0ae0114bdcac1501b5c3c0304c41bdab7505d93759303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1r3DAURUVoSKZJ_kAWQctu7D5J1nhcuglDvyDQTbIWsvRMZCxrIskJs8lvr4ZJQ1ddPXjcc-EeQq4Z1AzY-vNYuzH4mgPnNcgaWHNCVkx0XQXA4QNZQQesksDbc_IxpREAOrFpz8i5kK3kUsCKvN6j34UYvJ6t65dJRzoGN2e6iyHlR0wuUZ1ojqizx_IPu-zCTIcQ6T-MCbPdT0iHqE1eIqYvVNO0Txm9zs7QiM8OX2gBqMesKz3raV-6L8npoKeEV2_3gjx8_3a__Vnd_f7xa3t7V5kGIFdiM_Cyya570VkB7cZKCxqBsaa3RhsmgfXSCAMCGtOw3uq-lSBtJ1rZCRAX5NOxt8x6WjBl5V0yOE16xrAkxdcbBk0HTVOi_Bg1xUCKOKhddF7HvWKgDt7VqA7e1cG7AqmK9wLdvPUvvUf7jvwVXQJfjwEsK4uLqJJxOBu0LqLJygb3v_4_sPuWtg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2681049044</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Niezen, E.T. ; van Minnen, B. ; Bos, R.R.M. ; Dijkstra, P.U.</creator><creatorcontrib>Niezen, E.T. ; van Minnen, B. ; Bos, R.R.M. ; Dijkstra, P.U.</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9–2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1–16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P < 0.001). The TMJ prosthesis appears to be reserved for patients with persistent pain, bony or fibrous ankylosis, or osteomyelitis after primary closed or open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0901-5027</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1399-0020</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.014</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35752530</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Denmark: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Ankylosis - etiology ; Arthroplasty ; Bone fractures ; Humans ; Joint prosthesis ; Mandibular condyle ; Mandibular Condyle - injuries ; Mandibular Condyle - surgery ; Mandibular fractures ; Mandibular Fractures - complications ; Mandibular Fractures - surgery ; Meta-analysis ; Systematic review ; Temporomandibular joint ; Temporomandibular Joint - injuries ; Temporomandibular Joint - surgery ; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders - etiology ; Tooth Ankylosis - complications</subject><ispartof>International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2023-01, Vol.52 (1), p.88-97</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-38f2002d6b39d3078d5d0ae0114bdcac1501b5c3c0304c41bdab7505d93759303</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-38f2002d6b39d3078d5d0ae0114bdcac1501b5c3c0304c41bdab7505d93759303</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0901502722002272$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35752530$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Niezen, E.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Minnen, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bos, R.R.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkstra, P.U.</creatorcontrib><title>Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title><addtitle>Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><description>The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9–2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1–16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P < 0.001). The TMJ prosthesis appears to be reserved for patients with persistent pain, bony or fibrous ankylosis, or osteomyelitis after primary closed or open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle.</description><subject>Ankylosis - etiology</subject><subject>Arthroplasty</subject><subject>Bone fractures</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint prosthesis</subject><subject>Mandibular condyle</subject><subject>Mandibular Condyle - injuries</subject><subject>Mandibular Condyle - surgery</subject><subject>Mandibular fractures</subject><subject>Mandibular Fractures - complications</subject><subject>Mandibular Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Temporomandibular joint</subject><subject>Temporomandibular Joint - injuries</subject><subject>Temporomandibular Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Temporomandibular Joint Disorders - etiology</subject><subject>Tooth Ankylosis - complications</subject><issn>0901-5027</issn><issn>1399-0020</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1r3DAURUVoSKZJ_kAWQctu7D5J1nhcuglDvyDQTbIWsvRMZCxrIskJs8lvr4ZJQ1ddPXjcc-EeQq4Z1AzY-vNYuzH4mgPnNcgaWHNCVkx0XQXA4QNZQQesksDbc_IxpREAOrFpz8i5kK3kUsCKvN6j34UYvJ6t65dJRzoGN2e6iyHlR0wuUZ1ojqizx_IPu-zCTIcQ6T-MCbPdT0iHqE1eIqYvVNO0Txm9zs7QiM8OX2gBqMesKz3raV-6L8npoKeEV2_3gjx8_3a__Vnd_f7xa3t7V5kGIFdiM_Cyya570VkB7cZKCxqBsaa3RhsmgfXSCAMCGtOw3uq-lSBtJ1rZCRAX5NOxt8x6WjBl5V0yOE16xrAkxdcbBk0HTVOi_Bg1xUCKOKhddF7HvWKgDt7VqA7e1cG7AqmK9wLdvPUvvUf7jvwVXQJfjwEsK4uLqJJxOBu0LqLJygb3v_4_sPuWtg</recordid><startdate>202301</startdate><enddate>202301</enddate><creator>Niezen, E.T.</creator><creator>van Minnen, B.</creator><creator>Bos, R.R.M.</creator><creator>Dijkstra, P.U.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202301</creationdate><title>Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Niezen, E.T. ; van Minnen, B. ; Bos, R.R.M. ; Dijkstra, P.U.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-38f2002d6b39d3078d5d0ae0114bdcac1501b5c3c0304c41bdab7505d93759303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Ankylosis - etiology</topic><topic>Arthroplasty</topic><topic>Bone fractures</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint prosthesis</topic><topic>Mandibular condyle</topic><topic>Mandibular Condyle - injuries</topic><topic>Mandibular Condyle - surgery</topic><topic>Mandibular fractures</topic><topic>Mandibular Fractures - complications</topic><topic>Mandibular Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Temporomandibular joint</topic><topic>Temporomandibular Joint - injuries</topic><topic>Temporomandibular Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Temporomandibular Joint Disorders - etiology</topic><topic>Tooth Ankylosis - complications</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Niezen, E.T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Minnen, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bos, R.R.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dijkstra, P.U.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Niezen, E.T.</au><au>van Minnen, B.</au><au>Bos, R.R.M.</au><au>Dijkstra, P.U.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><date>2023-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>88</spage><epage>97</epage><pages>88-97</pages><issn>0901-5027</issn><eissn>1399-0020</eissn><abstract>The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) prosthesis as a treatment option after mandibular condyle fracture. Three databases were searched (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library) and 2670 unique papers were identified. A total of 337 studies were included (121 case reports, 89 case series, and 127 cohort/clinical studies). In total 14,396 patients and 21,560 prostheses were described. Of the 127 cohort or clinical studies, 100 (79%) reported inclusion criteria, 54 (43%) reported exclusion criteria, and 96 (76%) reported the inclusion period. The base population from which patients were recruited was reported in 57 studies (45%). The reason for TMJ prosthesis implantation was reported for 4177 patients (29.0%). A history of condylar fracture was present in 83 patients (2.0%); a history of mandibular trauma was present in 580 patients (13.9%). The meta-analysis showed a pooled prevalence of condylar fracture of 1.6% (95% confidence interval 0.9–2.4%) and a pooled prevalence of trauma or condylar fracture of 11.3% (95% confidence interval 7.1–16.0%). Heterogeneity was highly significant (P < 0.001). The TMJ prosthesis appears to be reserved for patients with persistent pain, bony or fibrous ankylosis, or osteomyelitis after primary closed or open treatment of fractures of the mandibular condyle.</abstract><cop>Denmark</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>35752530</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.014</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0901-5027 |
| ispartof | International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2023-01, Vol.52 (1), p.88-97 |
| issn | 0901-5027 1399-0020 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2681049044 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Ankylosis - etiology Arthroplasty Bone fractures Humans Joint prosthesis Mandibular condyle Mandibular Condyle - injuries Mandibular Condyle - surgery Mandibular fractures Mandibular Fractures - complications Mandibular Fractures - surgery Meta-analysis Systematic review Temporomandibular joint Temporomandibular Joint - injuries Temporomandibular Joint - surgery Temporomandibular Joint Disorders - etiology Tooth Ankylosis - complications |
| title | Temporomandibular joint prosthesis as treatment option for mandibular condyle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T23%3A22%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Temporomandibular%20joint%20prosthesis%20as%20treatment%20option%20for%20mandibular%20condyle%20fractures:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20oral%20and%20maxillofacial%20surgery&rft.au=Niezen,%20E.T.&rft.date=2023-01&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=88&rft.epage=97&rft.pages=88-97&rft.issn=0901-5027&rft.eissn=1399-0020&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.014&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2681049044%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2681049044&rft_id=info:pmid/35752530&rft_els_id=S0901502722002272&rfr_iscdi=true |