Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy): Midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale, subnasale, stomion superius, labrale superius)
Maxillary distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale,… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy); GRADE not reported.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy) Midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale, subnasale, stomion superius, labrale superius) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or… · 2 years Maxillary distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale,… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy); GRADE not reported. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients (2018) · Cochrane All outcomes | Results text (Ungraded; not in SoF): both groups showed notable positive soft tissue changes of the upper lip and nose after maxillary advancement (39 participants). Between-group soft tissue differences at 2 years… | 1 study · 39 participants | GRADE not reported |
Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy) Midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale, subnasale, stomion superius, labrale superius) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or… · 2 years Maxillary distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale,… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy); GRADE not reported. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients (2016) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD010403.PUB2, superseded | Results text (Ungraded; not in SoF): both groups showed notable positive soft tissue changes of the upper lip and nose after maxillary advancement (39 participants). Between-group soft tissue differences at 2 years… | 1 study · 39 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2018-05 | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.