Piezosurgery versus Conventional Cutting Techniques in Craniofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Connor McGuire, Colton Boudreau, Neetin Prabhu, Paul Hong, Michael Bezuhly

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Despite its increasing use in craniofacial surgery, the evidence for piezosurgery over conventional bone-cutting techniques has not been critically appraised. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify and assess the evidence that exists for the use of piezosurgery in craniofacial surgery. Methods: A systematic review was undertaken using a computerized search. Publication descriptors, methodologic details, and outcomes were extracted. Articles were assessed using the methodologic index for nonrandomized studies and Cochrane instruments. Random effects meta-analysis was completed. Results: Thirty-nine studies were included. Most studies were published within the past 5 years (51.3 percent) and were randomized controlled trials (56.4 percent). The mean age of patients was 27 years (range, 0.2 to 57 years), and the mean sample size was 44 (range, 12 to 180). Meta-analysis revealed that compared to conventional instruments, piezosurgery had a lower postoperative incidence of sensory disturbance, principally in mandibular procedures (OR, 0.29; 95 percent CI, 0.11 to 0.77; p = 0.01) and pain at postoperative day 3 (mean difference, -0.86; 95 percent CI, -1.20 to -0.53; p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in operating room time (mean difference, 8.60; 95 percent CI, -1.27 to 18.47; p = 0.80) or osteotomy time (mean difference, 0.35; 95 percent CI, -2.99 to 3.68; p = 0.84). Most studies were clinically homogenous (92 percent) and of high quality based on the methodologic index for nonrandomized studies instrument (84 percent). Few studies had domains at high risk of bias based on the Cochrane instrument (28.6 percent). Conclusions: Piezosurgery has considerable benefits when compared to conventional instruments. Future studies should investigate its cost-effectiveness and benefits in terms of blood loss, edema/ecchymosis, and patient satisfaction.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)183-195
Number of pages13
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume149
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Characteristics of included studies were published as early as 2005, with the majority published within the past 5 years (51 percent) (). The most common journals were the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery (21 percent) and the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (21 percent). Most studies were randomized controlled trials (56 percent) and published in Italy (28 percent) or Germany (26 percent). The mean patient age was 27 years (range, 0.2 to 57 years). The mean sample size was 44 (range of 12 to 180). Two studies received university funding, whereas one study had materials funded by industry (). ,

Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

  • Surgery

PubMed: MeSH publication types

  • Journal Article
  • Meta-Analysis
  • Systematic Review

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Piezosurgery versus Conventional Cutting Techniques in Craniofacial Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this