Loading…

Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Objective Piezosurgery, used in different otolaryngology procedures, was a breakthrough in surgery. We systematically reviewed the differences in outcomes after lateral nasal osteotomy with peizosurgery and conventional osteotome and quantified the differences through a meta‐analysis. Methods Medlin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Laryngoscope 2020-05, Vol.130 (5), p.1158-1165
Main Authors: Mirza, Ahmad A., Alandejani, Talal A., Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3
container_end_page 1165
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1158
container_title The Laryngoscope
container_volume 130
creator Mirza, Ahmad A.
Alandejani, Talal A.
Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.
description Objective Piezosurgery, used in different otolaryngology procedures, was a breakthrough in surgery. We systematically reviewed the differences in outcomes after lateral nasal osteotomy with peizosurgery and conventional osteotome and quantified the differences through a meta‐analysis. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were selected to search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published before January 2019 that detailed differences between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy. The key search terms included “rhinoplasty" and “piezosurgery.” Only RCTs in English with patients >18 years who underwent lateral osteotomy by percutaneous or internal approaches were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction and study inclusion. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance of the studies. The point of estimate in the meta‐analysis was the standardized mean difference and was pooled with the random‐effects model. The measured outcomes were ecchymosis, edema, postoperative pain, and duration of surgery. Results Five RCTs met our criteria and were analyzed in primary subsequent meta‐analyses. Piezosurgery demonstrated significantly lower edema (SMD = ‐0.75; 95% CI, ‐1.26, ‐0.24) and ecchymosis scores (SMD = ‐0.85; 95% CI, ‐1.49, ‐0.20) on postoperative days (POD) 2 or 3 than conventional surgery. They were also significantly lower with piezosurgery than conventional surgery on POD 7 (SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.21, ‐0.06; and SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.14, ‐0.14, respectively). Two studies that estimated the degree of pain showed that after piezosurgery, patients experienced lesser pain than after conventional surgery. The mean difference was ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐1.06, ‐0.39). Conclusions Piezosurgery causes less ecchymosis, edema, and pain than conventional osteotomy, without extending the duration of surgery. Laryngoscope, 130:1158–1165, 2020
doi_str_mv 10.1002/lary.28408
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2317604449</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2317604449</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtqGzEUhkVJqB23mz5AEGQTAuPq6tF0Z0xuYEgoLbSrQZaPGoWZkSPN2ExWeYQ-Y58kcux0kUVWZ_F_5-ecD6EvlIwpIexrpUM_ZkoQ9QENqeQ0E0UhD9AwhTxTkv0aoKMY7wmhOZfkIxpwmksl83yIFrcOHn3swh8IPV5DiF3ExjdraFrnG11hH1vwra977Boc7lzjV5WObf8NT3HsU1jr1hkcYO1gg3WzxDW0-t_TX522--jiJ3RodRXh836O0M-L8x-zq2x-c3k9m84zw2WuMm60JNbkwCyZCGGXiufGWs4KkisJqiBioiUVDBhoaZi0y4WVUk3oohDSGj5Cp7veVfAPHcS2rF00UFW6Ad_FkqWvJ0QIUST05A1677uQ7t1ShaBMUE4TdbajTPAxBrDlKrg6yS4pKbfmy6358sV8go_3ld2ihuV_9FV1AugO2LgK-neqyvn0--9d6TNjQJDM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2394124131</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Mirza, Ahmad A. ; Alandejani, Talal A. ; Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Mirza, Ahmad A. ; Alandejani, Talal A. ; Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective Piezosurgery, used in different otolaryngology procedures, was a breakthrough in surgery. We systematically reviewed the differences in outcomes after lateral nasal osteotomy with peizosurgery and conventional osteotome and quantified the differences through a meta‐analysis. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were selected to search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published before January 2019 that detailed differences between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy. The key search terms included “rhinoplasty" and “piezosurgery.” Only RCTs in English with patients &gt;18 years who underwent lateral osteotomy by percutaneous or internal approaches were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction and study inclusion. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance of the studies. The point of estimate in the meta‐analysis was the standardized mean difference and was pooled with the random‐effects model. The measured outcomes were ecchymosis, edema, postoperative pain, and duration of surgery. Results Five RCTs met our criteria and were analyzed in primary subsequent meta‐analyses. Piezosurgery demonstrated significantly lower edema (SMD = ‐0.75; 95% CI, ‐1.26, ‐0.24) and ecchymosis scores (SMD = ‐0.85; 95% CI, ‐1.49, ‐0.20) on postoperative days (POD) 2 or 3 than conventional surgery. They were also significantly lower with piezosurgery than conventional surgery on POD 7 (SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.21, ‐0.06; and SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.14, ‐0.14, respectively). Two studies that estimated the degree of pain showed that after piezosurgery, patients experienced lesser pain than after conventional surgery. The mean difference was ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐1.06, ‐0.39). Conclusions Piezosurgery causes less ecchymosis, edema, and pain than conventional osteotomy, without extending the duration of surgery. Laryngoscope, 130:1158–1165, 2020</description><identifier>ISSN: 0023-852X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-4995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/lary.28408</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31758577</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Edema ; Meta-analysis ; Nose ; osteotomy ; Otolaryngology ; Pain ; Piezosurgery ; Plastic surgery ; Rhinoplasty ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>The Laryngoscope, 2020-05, Vol.130 (5), p.1158-1165</ispartof><rights>2019 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><rights>2020 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7216-3018 ; 0000-0001-6035-9566</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31758577$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mirza, Ahmad A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alandejani, Talal A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</creatorcontrib><title>Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><title>The Laryngoscope</title><addtitle>Laryngoscope</addtitle><description>Objective Piezosurgery, used in different otolaryngology procedures, was a breakthrough in surgery. We systematically reviewed the differences in outcomes after lateral nasal osteotomy with peizosurgery and conventional osteotome and quantified the differences through a meta‐analysis. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were selected to search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published before January 2019 that detailed differences between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy. The key search terms included “rhinoplasty" and “piezosurgery.” Only RCTs in English with patients &gt;18 years who underwent lateral osteotomy by percutaneous or internal approaches were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction and study inclusion. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance of the studies. The point of estimate in the meta‐analysis was the standardized mean difference and was pooled with the random‐effects model. The measured outcomes were ecchymosis, edema, postoperative pain, and duration of surgery. Results Five RCTs met our criteria and were analyzed in primary subsequent meta‐analyses. Piezosurgery demonstrated significantly lower edema (SMD = ‐0.75; 95% CI, ‐1.26, ‐0.24) and ecchymosis scores (SMD = ‐0.85; 95% CI, ‐1.49, ‐0.20) on postoperative days (POD) 2 or 3 than conventional surgery. They were also significantly lower with piezosurgery than conventional surgery on POD 7 (SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.21, ‐0.06; and SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.14, ‐0.14, respectively). Two studies that estimated the degree of pain showed that after piezosurgery, patients experienced lesser pain than after conventional surgery. The mean difference was ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐1.06, ‐0.39). Conclusions Piezosurgery causes less ecchymosis, edema, and pain than conventional osteotomy, without extending the duration of surgery. Laryngoscope, 130:1158–1165, 2020</description><subject>Edema</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Nose</subject><subject>osteotomy</subject><subject>Otolaryngology</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Piezosurgery</subject><subject>Plastic surgery</subject><subject>Rhinoplasty</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0023-852X</issn><issn>1531-4995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtqGzEUhkVJqB23mz5AEGQTAuPq6tF0Z0xuYEgoLbSrQZaPGoWZkSPN2ExWeYQ-Y58kcux0kUVWZ_F_5-ecD6EvlIwpIexrpUM_ZkoQ9QENqeQ0E0UhD9AwhTxTkv0aoKMY7wmhOZfkIxpwmksl83yIFrcOHn3swh8IPV5DiF3ExjdraFrnG11hH1vwra977Boc7lzjV5WObf8NT3HsU1jr1hkcYO1gg3WzxDW0-t_TX522--jiJ3RodRXh836O0M-L8x-zq2x-c3k9m84zw2WuMm60JNbkwCyZCGGXiufGWs4KkisJqiBioiUVDBhoaZi0y4WVUk3oohDSGj5Cp7veVfAPHcS2rF00UFW6Ad_FkqWvJ0QIUST05A1677uQ7t1ShaBMUE4TdbajTPAxBrDlKrg6yS4pKbfmy6358sV8go_3ld2ihuV_9FV1AugO2LgK-neqyvn0--9d6TNjQJDM</recordid><startdate>202005</startdate><enddate>202005</enddate><creator>Mirza, Ahmad A.</creator><creator>Alandejani, Talal A.</creator><creator>Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7216-3018</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6035-9566</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202005</creationdate><title>Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis</title><author>Mirza, Ahmad A. ; Alandejani, Talal A. ; Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Edema</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Nose</topic><topic>osteotomy</topic><topic>Otolaryngology</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Piezosurgery</topic><topic>Plastic surgery</topic><topic>Rhinoplasty</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mirza, Ahmad A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alandejani, Talal A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mirza, Ahmad A.</au><au>Alandejani, Talal A.</au><au>Al‐Sayed, Ahmed A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis</atitle><jtitle>The Laryngoscope</jtitle><addtitle>Laryngoscope</addtitle><date>2020-05</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>130</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1158</spage><epage>1165</epage><pages>1158-1165</pages><issn>0023-852X</issn><eissn>1531-4995</eissn><abstract>Objective Piezosurgery, used in different otolaryngology procedures, was a breakthrough in surgery. We systematically reviewed the differences in outcomes after lateral nasal osteotomy with peizosurgery and conventional osteotome and quantified the differences through a meta‐analysis. Methods Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were selected to search for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published before January 2019 that detailed differences between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy. The key search terms included “rhinoplasty" and “piezosurgery.” Only RCTs in English with patients &gt;18 years who underwent lateral osteotomy by percutaneous or internal approaches were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed in data extraction and study inclusion. Two independent reviewers assessed the relevance of the studies. The point of estimate in the meta‐analysis was the standardized mean difference and was pooled with the random‐effects model. The measured outcomes were ecchymosis, edema, postoperative pain, and duration of surgery. Results Five RCTs met our criteria and were analyzed in primary subsequent meta‐analyses. Piezosurgery demonstrated significantly lower edema (SMD = ‐0.75; 95% CI, ‐1.26, ‐0.24) and ecchymosis scores (SMD = ‐0.85; 95% CI, ‐1.49, ‐0.20) on postoperative days (POD) 2 or 3 than conventional surgery. They were also significantly lower with piezosurgery than conventional surgery on POD 7 (SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.21, ‐0.06; and SMD = ‐0.64; 95% CI, ‐1.14, ‐0.14, respectively). Two studies that estimated the degree of pain showed that after piezosurgery, patients experienced lesser pain than after conventional surgery. The mean difference was ‐0.73 (95% CI, ‐1.06, ‐0.39). Conclusions Piezosurgery causes less ecchymosis, edema, and pain than conventional osteotomy, without extending the duration of surgery. Laryngoscope, 130:1158–1165, 2020</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>31758577</pmid><doi>10.1002/lary.28408</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7216-3018</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6035-9566</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0023-852X
ispartof The Laryngoscope, 2020-05, Vol.130 (5), p.1158-1165
issn 0023-852X
1531-4995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2317604449
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Edema
Meta-analysis
Nose
osteotomy
Otolaryngology
Pain
Piezosurgery
Plastic surgery
Rhinoplasty
Systematic review
title Piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T16%3A34%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Piezosurgery%20versus%20conventional%20osteotomy%20in%20rhinoplasty:%20A%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta%E2%80%90analysis&rft.jtitle=The%20Laryngoscope&rft.au=Mirza,%20Ahmad%20A.&rft.date=2020-05&rft.volume=130&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1158&rft.epage=1165&rft.pages=1158-1165&rft.issn=0023-852X&rft.eissn=1531-4995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/lary.28408&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2317604449%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3578-3ca50fc7e2f0644fd837cff3290785e89046a5142e2ea5c25fdbf55861b945fc3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2394124131&rft_id=info:pmid/31758577&rfr_iscdi=true