Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 23, 2025
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Systematic mapping review of orthognathic surgery
Josefina Bendersky1, Macarena Uribe2, Maximiliano Bravo3
1Iberoamerican Cochrane Center, Institut d'Recerca-Servei d'Epidemiologia Clínica i Salut Pública. Carrer de Sant Quintí, 89, 08041 Barcelona, Spain; School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, Vicuña Mackenna 4860, Santiago, Chile; Universitat autónoma de Barcelona, Campus de la UAB, Plaça Cívica, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
This systematic mapping review identified research on orthognathic surgery (OS) co-interventions and modalities. High-quality research is needed to address identified knowledge gaps in OS.
Area of Science:
- Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
- Orthodontics
- Evidence-Based Dentistry
Background:
- Orthognathic surgery (OS) involves complex procedures with various co-interventions and surgical techniques.
- A comprehensive understanding of the existing research landscape is crucial for advancing OS practices.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically map and organize current clinical research on co-interventions and surgical modalities in OS.
- To identify research gaps and guide future high-quality investigations in the field.
Main Methods:
- A systematic mapping review was conducted, searching multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, etc.) and grey literature.
- Included were systematic reviews (SRs), randomized controlled trials, and observational studies evaluating perioperative OS co-interventions and modalities.
- Evidence bubble maps were generated to visualize the research landscape.
Main Results:
- The review included 35 SRs and 253 primary studies, with a significant portion of SRs rated as critically low quality.
- Nineteen PICO questions focused on osteosynthesis, surgical devices, antibiotics, corticosteroids, and induced hypotension.
- Fifteen research gaps were identified across various aspects of OS.
Conclusions:
- The current body of research on OS co-interventions and modalities is largely of low quality.
- There is a critical need for high-quality primary and secondary research to address the identified knowledge gaps and improve OS outcomes.
