Question · asked by 1 review
Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation vs Titanium plates or screws for fixation: Re-operation and revision rate / plate removal (adverse effect)
- Population
- Adults (>16 years old) undergoing orthognathic surgery
- Intervention
- Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation
- Comparison
- Titanium plates or screws for fixation
- Outcome
- Re-operation and revision rate / plate removal (adverse effect)
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Resorbable (bioresorbable) plates or screws for fixation vs Titanium plates or screws for fixation Re-operation and revision rate / plate removal (adverse effect) · Adults (>16 years old) undergoing orthognathic surgery · Up to 3 years postoperatively Resorbable versus titanium plates for orthognathic surgery (2017) · Cochrane All outcomes | Plate removal rates were 1.53% (3/196) of the titanium plates and 3.63% (6/165) of the resorbable ones. Out of a total of nine, two in each group were removed because of plate exposure, one patient in the titanium and… | 1 study · 60 participants | GRADE not reported |
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 orthognathic surgery 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2017-01 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.