Risk of Lower Eyelids Malposition in Subciliary Compared to Transconjunctival Approach in Maxillofacial Fractures Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Both subciliary and transconjunctival approaches have been used for decades to visualise the site of the maxillofacial fracture. The most common complication following those procedures is lower eyelids malposition. AIM: This meta-analysis will analyse which approach (subciliary and transconjunctival approaches) is more favourable to decrease lower eyelids malposition incidence. METHOD: This meta-analysis was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. The electronic search was conducted using keywords (“Lower Eyelids Malposition” OR “Complications” OR “Ectropion” OR “Entropion”) AND (Transconjunctival) AND (Subciliary) AND (Maxillofacial Fractures) in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and Directory of Open Access Journal (DOAJ). This review included full-text studies (observational and randomised controlled trials) in English comparing subciliary and transconjunctival approach in patients with maxillofacial fractures in the last 10 years. The data collected were the type of fractures and approaches, ectropion and entropion incidence as well as follow-up duration. The risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist. Statistical analysis was done using Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane, Denmark). RESULT: This study included 3 cohort studies and 2 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) studies from 2012 to 2017 with a total of 574 samples. Subciliary approach had a significant higher ectropion incidence when compared to transconjunctival approach (RR = 4.64, 95% CI: 1.68-12.81, p = 0.003). There was also a significant reduction of entropion incidence in patients with subciliary approach compared to transconjunctival approach (RR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.04 – 0.69, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: There was no superiority between one procedure toward another since each procedure related to different lower eyelids malpositions.