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.Methods:
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.Results:
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).Conclusions:
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.