ABSTRACT
Background: Rhinoplasty is a common plastic surgery procedure with evolving surgical techniques. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the outcomes of piezosurgery versus conventional osteotomy in rhinoplasty. Methods: A comprehensive search of six databases yielded 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing piezosurgery (292 cases) to conventional osteotomy (338 cases) in rhinoplasty patients. The examined outcomes included postoperative edema, ecchymosis, complications, pain (using the Visual Analogue Scale-VAS), and operative time. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the assessment timepoint, surgical approach, and outcome grade. The risk of bias was evaluated using the revised Cochrane tool. Results: Piezosurgery showed a significant reduction in the degree of postoperative edema (second and seventh postoperative days) and ecchymosis (second, fourth, and seventh postoperative days). The external approach in piezosurgery demonstrated greater benefits for both outcomes. Piezosurgery was associated with a significant reduction in overall complications, especially mucosal injuries, compared to conventional osteotomy, with no significant difference regarding postoperative hemorrhage. A significant reduction in pain scores and the need for analgesia was observed with piezosurgery. No significant difference was found in operative time. Conclusions: Piezosurgery offers significant benefits in patient outcomes, with similar operative time between both techniques. However, long-term investigations are still needed.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The added benefit of using near-infrared autofluorescence (NIRAF) during total thyroidectomy (TT) remains controversial. This study investigated whether or not NIRAF results in improved patient outcomes postoperatively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 1711 TT patients, reported in nine randomized controlled trials, following a systematic search of five databases. NIRAF was compared to the standard of care (naked eye with/without white light). Outcomes included parathyroid gland (PG) and calcium parameters and other clinical outcomes. For dichotomous outcomes, the log odds ratio (logOR) was calculated, and for continuous outcomes, the crude mean difference (MD) was measured. Sensitivity analysis was performed when heterogeneity was significant. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality. RESULTS: Compared to the standard of care, the use of NIRAF was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative hypoparathyroidism [logOR=-0.31; 95% CI: -0.57: -0.05], inadvertent PG removal [logOR=-0.93; 95% CI: -1.60: -0.26], and postoperative hypocalcemia [logOR=-0.43 mmol/l; 95% CI: -0.77: -0.09]. It was also associated with significantly higher postoperative PTH levels [MD=4.78 pg/ml; 95% CI: 2.13: 7.43], PG identification rate [logOR=1.02; 95% CI: 0.31: 1.72], postoperative serum calcium [MD=0.05; 95% CI: 0.00: 0.09], and operative time [MD=9.38 min; 95% CI: 6.68: 12.09]. No difference was seen regarding PG autotransplantation, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization due to hypocalcemia. Seven trials had low risk and the remainder had some concerns. CONCLUSION: NIRAF is superior to the naked eye in identifying all four PGs during TT. The reduced risk of postoperative hypoparathyroidism and hypocalcemia reflected this preservation value. However, it was not associated with a change in the length of hospital stay. Although rare, the readmission rate due to hypocalcemia was similar across both methods.
