Bone-impacted fibular free flap: Long-term dental implant success and complications compared to traditional fibular free tissue transfer

Application of a vascularized bone free flap and survival rate of dental implants after transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

As maxillofacial surgical techniques have advanced, vascularized bone free flap transplantation has become the standard treatment for repairing maxillofacial defects. In this meta-analysis, we summarize the survival rates of implants after VBFF surgery for maxillary and mandibular reconstructions and investigate the factors affecting patient outcomes.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Wanfang databases were searched up to May 31, 2022. The results of the treatment effect are presented as the risk ratio or odds ratio, using 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance was calculated at α = 0.05 (two-tailed z tests).

RESULTS

35 studies were included in our analysis. The results revealed a 3-year and 5-year implant survival rate of 95.2% and 85.4% in VBFFs, respectively. The location of jaw defects (maxilla or mandible) or timing of implantation was not found to have a statistically significant influence on the survival rate. However, statistically significant differences were observed in the failure of implants placed in irradiated bone tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically significant differences were not found in the implant survival rate between simultaneous and delayed implantation, or between maxillary and mandibular defects. However, dental implants placed in irradiated flaps tended to have a lower survival rate than those surgically placed in non-irradiated flaps.

The Accuracy of 3D Surgical Design and Simulation in Prefabricated Fibula Free Flaps for Jaw Reconstruction

The ideal jaw reconstruction involves the restoration and maintenance of jaw continuity, jaw relations, joint alignment, and facial contour, and, most importantly, dental occlusal reconstruction. One of the essential requirements of achieving a consistent functional outcome is to place the bony reconstruction in the correct three-dimensional position as it relates to the other jaw segments and dentition. A protocol of occlusion-driven reconstruction of prefabricated fibular free flaps that are customized to the patient with surgical design and simulation (SDS)-planned osseointegrated implant installation was developed by our institution. This innovation introduced significant flexibility and efficiency to jaw reconstructions, but functional and cosmetic outcomes were dependent on the accuracy of the final reconstructions when compared to the SDS plan. The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of the SDS-planned fibular flap prefabrication in a cohort of patients undergoing jaw reconstruction. All patients that had undergone primary jaw reconstruction with prefabricated fibular free flaps were reviewed. The primary outcome of this study was the accuracy of the postoperative implant positions as compared to the SDS plan. A total of 23 implants were included in the analysis. All flaps survived, there was no implant loss postoperatively, and all the patients underwent all stages of the reconstruction. SDS planning of fibular flap prefabrication resulted in better than 2 mm accuracy of osteointegrated implant placement in a cohort of patients undergoing jaw reconstruction. This accuracy could potentially result in improved functional and cosmetic outcomes.

Dental implants in patients with head and neck cancer-A systematic review and meta-analysis of the influence of radiotherapy on implant survival

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare implant survival in irradiated and non-irradiated bone and to investigate potential risk factors for implant therapy in oral cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An extensive search in the electronic databases of the National Library of Medicine was performed. Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA statement. The meta-analysis was performed for studies with a mean follow-up of at least three and five years, respectively.

RESULTS

The systematic review resulted in a mean overall implant survival of 87.8% (34%-100%). The meta-analysis revealed a significantly higher rate of implant failure in irradiated bone compared to non-irradiated bone (p < .00001, OR 1.97, CI [1.63, 2.37]). The studies also showed that implants placed into irradiated grafted bone were more likely to fail than those in irradiated native bone (p < .0001, OR 2.26, CI [1.50, 3.40]).

CONCLUSION

Even though overall implant survival was high, radiotherapy proves to be a significant risk factor for implant loss. Augmentation procedures may also increase the risk of an adverse outcome, especially in combination with radiotherapy.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The treatment of patients receiving radiotherapy of any form requires precise individual planning and a close aftercare. Implants should be placed in local bone rather than in bone grafts, if possible.

Survival rates of dental implants in patients with head and neck pathologies: 12-year single-operator study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the survival rates of dental implants placed in patients with head and neck pathologies treated with resective surgery with or without free flap reconstruction, radiotherapy alone, and/or chemotherapy.

STUDY DESIGN

In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the survival of intraoral dental implants placed by the same surgeon over a 12-year period from 2007 to 2019. These implants were followed up clinically and radiographically for a period of 36 months postoperatively and throughout the restorative phase.

RESULTS

A total of 190 patients with a total of 739 dental implants, comprising both intraoral and zygomatic implants, were included in this study. Overall, the dental implant survival rate was 95%, with a similar rate for dental implants placed in irradiated and nonirradiated bone (90% vs 93%). A lower implant survival rate was noted in implants placed in transplanted bone (79%). In cases of implant failure (n = 17), 35% (n = 6) of protheses survived and remained functional.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the placement of dental implants in patients with benign and malignant pathologies of the head and neck to improve their quality of life. However, we highlight the need for careful surgical planning and placement by experienced clinicians.

Risk factor analysis of dental implants in patients with irradiated head and neck cancer

Background

We investigated dental implant outcomes in patients who had previously received radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck malignancies.

Methods

We reviewed 90 dental implants in 27 patients who received RT for head and neck cancer and received dental implants afterwards. The cumulative implant survival rate (CISR) was calculated. In addition, the implant quality was assessed using “Health Scale for Dental Implants.”

Results

The CISR at 3 years was 79.6%. The mean radiation dose at the implant site (D_mean) was identified as an independent prognostic factor for implant survival. No implant failed if D_mean was less than 38 Gy. Regarding implant quality, dental implants in grafted bone and D_mean were independent risk factors.

Conclusions

D_mean was identified as an independent prognostic factor for implant survival and quality. Dental implants can be safely considered when D_mean is lower than 38 Gy.

Bone Augmentation for Implant Placement: Recent Advances

There are various advancements in biomaterials and methods for bone augmentation. This article aims to review the recent advances in bone augmentation for dental implants. Relevant articles on bone augmentation for dental implants were searched in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Science Direct published in English literature published between January 1996 and March 2021. Relevant studies on bone grafts for dental implants were included and critically analyzed in this review. Various biomaterials can be used to augment bone for implant placement. Each graft procedure has advantages and disadvantages in each clinical application and needs to choose the graft material with a high success rate and less morbidity.

The role of folded fibular flap in patients' reconstruction of mandibular defects: a retrospective clinical study

This study has analyzed 41 patients with mandibular ameloblastoma who underwent a partial mandibulectomy and reconstruction by folding the free fibular flap. In the preoperative and postoperative (6 months and 24 months after surgery), the Quality of Life (QOL) of these patients was assessed by using the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL) and the medical outcome study short form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires. SPSS 20.0 statistical software was used to conduct statistical analysis on the base data of the two groups of patients. Independent sample t test was conducted for sf-36 and UW-QOL scores at two time points in each group. The SF-36 survey showed that body pain (54.54 ± 8.10), general health (55.27 ± 7.54), and health changes (58.29 ± 9.60) decreased significantly at 6 months after surgery, but the mean score at 24 months after surgery all exceeded the preoperational level. At 24 months after the surgery, the vitality (80.41 ± 3.74), social function (81.61 ± 4.07), emotional role (82.39 ± 4.07), psychological health (81.66 ± 4.37) and total score (704.00 ± 31.53) all returned to the preoperative level, which was statistically significant compared with 6 months after surgery. However, there was no significant difference compared with the preoperative level. The UW-QOL survey showed that chewing (56.68 ± 7.23), speech (54.54 ± 7.7) and taste (62.29 ± 10.15) have significantly changed at 6 months after the surgery, and the difference was statistically significant at 24 months after surgery. Saliva generation decreased slightly (80.76 ± 3.35) at 6 months after surgery, but quickly returned to the preoperative level (81.59 ± 4.06). The total score of the patients almost recovered to the preoperative level at 24 months after surgery. The folded the fibular flap can not only repair the defects of soft tissue and bone tissue, but also restore the height of the alveolar ridge to, avoid the imbalance of crown and root ratio after implantation and reduce the occurrence of peri-implant inflammation, so that a true functional reconstruction can be realized.

Outcomes of osseointegrated implants in patients with benign and malignant pathologies of the head and neck: a 10-year single-centre study

The surgical management of head and neck pathologies involving the maxilla and mandible results in significant functional and aesthetic deficits, and ultimately reduced quality of life. Composite free flaps used for reconstruction address many of these deficits and create a foundation for the use of osseointegrated implants to support prosthetic replacement of the dentition. There are few comparative studies examining outcomes of implants in native and reconstructed bone in head and neck cancer patients. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare survival rates and the effects of risk factors between implants placed in native and reconstructed bone. The Kaplan-Meier method estimated cumulative 1- and 5-year implant survival rates of 99.5% and 95% for native bone and 96% and 88% for reconstructed bone. Multivariate Cox regression found an increased risk of implant failure in reconstructed bone (hazard ratio (HR) 9.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.4-29.7, P<0.001). Subgroup analysis of the cohorts found an increased risk of failure in the reconstructed group associated with radiotherapy (HR 6.4, 95% CI 1.8-22.3, P=0.004), current smoking (HR 23.2, 95% CI 2.7-198.6, P=0.004), and previous smoking (HR 9.0, 95% CI 1.1-71.9, P=0.038). There was no effect in the native bone group. Implants placed into reconstructed bone had higher rates of failure, and smoking status and radiotherapy increased the risk of implant failure.

Dental Implant Survival in Vascularized Bone Flaps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Maxillofacial reconstruction with vascularized bone restores facial contour and provides structural support and a foundation for dental rehabilitation. Routine implant placement in such cases, however, remains uncommon. This study aims to determine dental implant survival in patients undergoing vascularized maxillary or mandibular reconstruction through a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the literature was queried for implant placement in reconstructed jaws using Medical Subject Headings terms on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane platforms. Weighted implant survivals were calculated for the entire cohort and subcohorts stratified by radiotherapy. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate effect of radiation on implant osseointegration.

RESULTS

Of 3965 publications identified, 42 were reviewed, including 1084 patients with 3636 dental implants. Weighted implant survival was 92.2 percent at a median follow-up of 36 months. Survival was 97.0 percent in 269 implants placed immediately in 60 patients versus 89.9 percent in 1897 delayed implants placed in 597 patients, with follow-up of 14 and 40 months, respectively. Dental implants without radiotherapy exposure had better survival than those exposed to radiation (95.3 versus 84.6 percent; p < 0.01) at a median follow-up of 36 months. Meta-analyses showed that radiation significantly increased the risk of implant failure (risk ratio, 4.74; p < 0.01) and suggested that implants placed before radiotherapy trended toward better survival (88.9 percent versus 83.4 percent, p = 0.07; risk ratio, 0.52; p = 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall implant survival was 92.2 percent; however, radiotherapy adversely impacted outcomes. Implants placed before radiotherapy may demonstrate superior survival than implants placed after.

Systematic review and pooled analysis of survival rates, success, and outcomes of osseointegrated implants in a variety of composite free flaps

The aim of this review was to provide an update on survival rates of osseointegrated implants into common composite free flaps used for maxillary and mandibular reconstructions and identify factors affecting outcomes. PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched. Included studies reported implant survival by flap type. Results were pooled and survival was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Variables affecting survival were assessed using Cox regression. Thirty-two of the 2631 articles retrieved were included, totaling 2626 implants placed into fibula, iliac crest, scapula, and radial forearm free flaps. Pooled survival showed 94% 5-year survival of implants in fibula and iliac crest with no difference between groups (P = .3). Factors effecting survival included radiotherapy (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.6, P = .027) and malignant disease (HR 2.2, 95%CI 1.6-3.1, P < .001). Implant survival appears adequate across common flap types; however, there are limited numbers reported in less common flaps.

Palatomaxillary Reconstruction: Fibula or Scapula

Palatomaxillary reconstruction presents a unique challenge for the reconstructive surgeon. The maxillofacial skeleton preserves critical aerodigestive functions-it provides a stable hard palate to support mastication and separate the nasal and oral cavities, and buttress support to provide adequate midface contour. Free tissue transfer has become a routine part of the reconstructive ladder in managing palatomaxillary defects. While there is a wide variety of options for bony reconstruction within the head and neck, the fibula and the scapula, and their variations, have become two of the most commonly used options for midface reconstruction. This review will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both in specific regard to reconstruction of the palatomaxillary area.

Contemporary Approach to Locally Advanced Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Surgical management of locally advanced oral cavity squamous cell carcinomas (OCSCC) has long been recognized as a primary treatment modality. Technological advances have led to significant improvements in our surgical approach, from improvement in the visualization of tumors to more efficient and precise reconstruction. Here, we review the latest technological advances in surgical extirpation and reconstruction of locally advanced OCSCCs.

RECENT FINDINGS

The focus of technological innovation in surgical extirpation has been on improving visualization, with the use of intraoperative ultrasound for margin delineation, intraoperative navigation, narrow-band imaging, and the use of fluorescence. Though early, these are promising steps to ensuring complete resection of the cancer. Advances in reconstruction have been centered on the incorporation of computer assisted design, manufacturing, and virtual surgical planning, allowing for more complex three-dimensional defects to be expeditiously reconstructed. As these technologies are still under development, their impact on oncologic outcomes are not yet robustly defined; however, as technology continues to advance and become more widely available, new technologies will undoubtedly become integrated into enhancing surgical precision and planning.

Long term follow-up of titanium implants installed in block-grafted areas: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

An enduring clinical question concerns the outcome (ie, success) of implants placed in areas grafted with block-grafts.

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a systematic review of the literature on the long term results (≥5 years) of implants placed in maxillofacial areas grafted with any type of osseous block-grafts in two-stage surgeries. Further, the review addresses how available success criteria were used within the studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE bibliographic databases were searched up to March 2017 for studies evaluating the long term results of implants placed in grafted areas. The search strategy was restricted to English language publications using combined terms which referred to the treatment method (implants placed in areas grafted with bone blocks), and follow-up characteristics (≥5 years and assessment of at least one parameter related to implant success criteria). To qualify for inclusion, studies should present outcome measurements indicating the success (or at least the survival) of the implants.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 17 studies, which were included in this systematic review. These studies presented survival rates ranging from 88.7% (after 15 years follow-up) to 98.7% (after 5 years follow-up). Five studies presented data based on predefined success criteria with success rates ranging from 86.8% to 100%. In these studies, the term "success" was often not properly defined.

CONCLUSION

The long term survival (≥5 years) of implants placed into block-grafted areas in two-stage surgeries was not lower than 75%, while success rates ranged from 86.8% to 100%. Although it was possible to identify published success criteria for implant follow-up, there is no broad consensus on how to report implant success in a consistent manner.