Question · asked by 1 review
Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation vs Titanium plates or screws for fixation: Swelling (mean)
- Population
- Adults over 18 years of age with fractures of the facial skeleton including the mandible, maxilla, zygoma (malar); studies on fractures of the mandibular condyle excluded
- Intervention
- Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation
- Comparison
- Titanium plates or screws for fixation
- Outcome
- Swelling (mean)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Bioresorbable plates or screws (or both) vs Titanium plates or screws (used as lag screws) or both Postoperative swelling assessment · Participants over 18 years of age with fractures of the facial skeleton including the mandible, maxilla, zygoma… · 0 to 48 hours after surgery The review found no eligible studies for this question. Resorbable versus titanium plates for facial fractures (2009) · Cochrane All outcomes | Planned secondary outcome not assessed: none of the retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria, so no data were available for analysis. Verbatim (Effects of interventions): "Although 53 studies were retrieved in our… | 0 studies | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resorbable versus titanium plates for facial fractures 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2008-08 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation vs Titanium plates or screws for fixation · Adults (>16 years old) undergoing orthognathic surgery · 1 review
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.