Abstract

Study design: Systematic mapping reviewAim and scope: The objective of this mapping review was to identify, describe, and organize clinical research currently available from systematic reviews and primary studies regarding co-interventions and different surgical modalities used in orthognathic surgery (OS) and their outcomes.Methods: Systematic reviews (SRs), randomized controlled trials, and observational studies that evaluated perioperative OS co-interventions and surgical modalities were identified in an exhaustive search of MED-LINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Grey literature was also screened.Results: Included were 35 SRs and 253 primary studies, 103 from SRs, and another 150 identified in our search. Overall, SR quality was rated as critically low, with only two SRs rated as of high quality. 19 questions on population, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes (PICO) extracted from the SRs focused on osteosyn-thesis methods, surgical cutting devices, and use of antibiotics, corticosteroids, and induced hypotension. Also identified were 15 research gaps. Evidence bubble maps were created to graphically depict the available evidence.Conclusion: Future high-quality research, both primary and secondary, is needed to address the knowledge gaps identified in this systematic mapping review.(c) 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.