Original ArticlesResorbable Versus Titanium Fixation of Le Fort I OsteotomyPasseri, Luis Augusto DDS, PhD*; Bento, Adriano Mesquita MD*; Vanni, Tazio MD, PhD†Author Information *Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas †Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Luis Augusto Passeri, DDS, PhD, Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences - Unicamp, Rua Tessalia Vieira de Camargo, 126, 12083-887 Campinas, SP, Brazil; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Received 13 September, 2019 Accepted 29 November, 2019 Funding was provided by the Brazilian Ministry of Health sponsored this work through PROADI-SUS, a program to support the development of the Brazilian National Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS) in a partnership with the Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz. The authors report no conflicts of interest. Supplemental digital contents are available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's Web site (www.jcraniofacialsurgery.com). Journal of Craniofacial Surgery: June 2020 - Volume 31 - Issue 4 - p 934-939 doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006248 Buy SDC Metrics Abstract Resorbable and titanium systems have been used in maxillary fixation. The aim of this review was to evaluate stability and morbidity of Le Fort I osteotomy by comparing both systems. It was performed in 11 databases, and reported according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials, and retrospective comparative studies with patients who underwent nonsegmented Le Fort I osteotomy were included. Eleven articles were selected, with a total of 262 patients treated with resorbable and 252 with titanium fixation. The meta-analysis showed that when measured at point A, horizontal stability was 0.06 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] −0.19, 0.30), vertical stability for impaction was −0.43 mm (95% CI −0.94, 0.07), and for inferior repositioning was −1.29 mm (95% CI −2.62, 0.04). Morbidity was similar in the groups. Regarding infection, resorbable presented an absolute risk (AR) = 0.032, and titanium an AR = 0.025 (P = 1.0). For soft tissue reaction, an AR = 0.120 was shown for resorbable, and an AR = 0.132 for titanium (P = 0.85). Removal of fixation showed an AR = 0.024 for resorbable, and an AR = 0.025 for titanium (P = 1.0). Based on these results, resorbable and metal fixation systems seem to be equivalent with respect to stability and morbidity. This review was limited by the quality of the studies. Future studies should address these quality limitations to improve comparison between these 2 fixation approaches. © 2020 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.