Evidence Hub

Prevalence of Different Forms and Involved Bones of Craniofacial Fibrous Dysplasia

Yang L, Wu H, Lu J, Teng L

The Journal of craniofacial surgery, 2017

487 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to analyze the prevalence of various craniofacial bones involved in patients with craniofacial fibrous dysplasia (CFD) and to demonstrate the most common form and bone involvement in patients with CFD for surgeons.

METHODS: To address the research purpose, the authors designed and performed a systematic review with meta-analysis. A comprehensive electronic search without date was performed in August 2013. Data extracted from the previously published literature were analyzed with STATA 11.0 software.

RESULTS: Relevant data were extracted from 18 studies (487 total participants) and revealed that in CFD patients, the prevalence of the monostotic type was 56% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.42-0.70; P = 0.000) and polyostotic type was 47% (95% CI: 0.31-0.63; P = 0.000); McCune-Albright syndrome was a relatively rare form (7%; 95% CI: 0.02-0.12; P = 0.006). Subgroup analyses indicated that the maxilla was most commonly involved (28%; 95% CI: 0.42-0.70; P = 0.000) in monostotic CFD, followed by the orbital (27%; 95% CI: -0.23-0.76; P = 0.298), mandibular (25%; 95% CI: 0.16-0.35; P = 0.000), frontal (22%; 95% CI: 0.09-0.34; P = 0.001), and temporal bones (12%; 95% CI: 0.03-0.21; P = 0.012). The prevalence of maxilla involvement in polyostotic CFD patients was as high as 30% (95% CI: 0.18-0.42; P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found that monostotic and polyostotic forms of CFD shared similar prevalence rates. Furthermore, the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 487 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free