Locking Plate System Versus Standard Plate Fixation in the Management of Mandibular Fractures: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid



The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of the 2.0-mm locking miniplate system in comparison with the standard miniplate system in treatment of mandible fractures.


A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, examining Medline-Ovid, Embase, and PubMed databases, eligible studies were restricted to comparative controlled trials. Inclusion criteria were based on humans randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, with the aim of comparing 2 fixation techniques, namely locking miniplate and standard miniplate (nonlocking miniplate) techniques. In addition, the incidence of complications was evaluated.


Nine studies with 380 patients and 551 fracture sites were enrolled into the analysis. The results showed that there were no significant differences in overall complications (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34–1.22; P = 0.2), postoperative infection (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.23–1.23, P = 0.15), and occlusion discrepancy (P > 0.05) when comparing 2.0-mm locking miniplates with 2.0-mm nonlocking miniplates in treating mandible fractures. However, the use of 2.0-mm locking miniplates had a lower postoperative maxillomandibular fixation rate than the use of 2.0-mm nonlocking miniplates (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22–0.83; P < 0.0001).


Mandible fractures treated with 2.0-mm locking miniplates and standard 2.0-mm miniplates present similar short-term complication rates, and the low postoperative maxillomandibular fixation rate of using 2.0-mm locking miniplates also indicates that the 2.0-mm locking miniplate has a promising application in treatment of mandibular fractures.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles