Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions| Reviewers

Login 
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 395    
     
REVIEW ARTICLES
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 503-509

Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for the assessment of maxillofacial fractures: A meta-analysis


1 Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India
2 Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dentistry Faculty of Kabul Medical University, Kabul, Afghanistan
4 Oral Medicine and Radiology, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Kalyana-Chakravarthy Pentapati
Public Health Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal 576104, Karnataka.
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_201_21

Rights and Permissions

Objective: To evaluate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography (USG) in maxillofacial fractures. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was performed in five databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source) from inception to September 12, 2020. Studies that reported or from which sensitivity and specificity can be calculated and studies published in the English language were included. Conference proceedings, letter to editors, and case reports were excluded. Screening of studies, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (QUADAS -2) were done separately by two review authors. A bivariate random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimates. Results: After the removal of duplicates, 1852 studies were included for screening of title and abstracts. Only 22 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. The sample size ranged from 6 to 87. The majority of the studies assessed orbit and nasal bones fractures. Only two studies included a comprehensive assessment of facial fractures. The overall sensitivity and specificity values were 0.94 and 0.96, respectively. Conclusion: USG has good diagnostic accuracy for the assessment of fractures of orbit and nasal bones. Clinicians need to consider the advantages and limitations of USG before recommending advanced imaging modalities.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed727    
    Printed24    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded107    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal