The Zygomatic Implant Perforated (ZIP) flap reconstructive technique for the management of low-level maxillary malignancy - clinical & patient related outcomes on 35 consecutively treated patients

Surgical and health related quality of life outcomes following treatment with zygomatic implant perforated (ZIP) flaps

BACKGROUND

The zygomatic implant perforated (ZIP) flap is a novel approach to the challenge of reconstructing the maxilla. We report on our experience using the ZIP flap technique for patients undergoing infrastructure maxillectomy at Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, Australia.

METHODS

Thirteen patients who underwent a ZIP flap reconstruction between August 2019 and August 2021 were identified. Demographic, surgical, and histopathological information was collected. Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) was assessed using the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer module, the M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory, and the Speech Handicap Index.

RESULTS

A total of 44 zygomatic implants were placed, of which 42 (95%) survived. The median time from surgery to dental rehabilitation was 35 days. HRQOL data was available for nine patients over 24 months, demonstrating improved speech and swallowing outcomes over the follow up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The ZIP flap is a reproducible surgical technique that facilitates rapid dental rehabilitation post infrastructure maxillectomy.

Long-term treatment outcomes with zygomatic implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis on the long-term survival rates of zygomatic implants (ZI). ZI success, prostheses survival and success, sinus pathology and patient reported outcomes were also investigated.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Embase and OvidMedline databases were searched alongside the grey literature. The systematic review was recorded in PROSPERO (CRD42022358024). Studies reporting titanium/titanium alloy ZI survival data, ZI-supported prosthesis data, ZIs directly compared to any other implant therapy including grafted sites, a minimum follow-up time of 3 years and a minimum number of 10 patients were included. All study designs were considered if they met the inclusion criteria. Studies not involving ZIs, ZIs not made from titanium/titanium alloy, a follow-up time of < 3 years or < 10 patients, animal studies and in vitro studies were excluded. Long-term follow-up has not been defined in the literature. A minimum of 3 years follow-up was considered acceptable to capture survival after initial healing, alongside in-function prosthesis data via delayed or immediate load protocols. ZI success, was predominantly defined as ZI survival without biological or neurological complications. Meta-analyses were performed for ZI survival, ZI failure incidence, ZI success, loading protocol, prosthesis survival, and prevalence of sinusitis using random effects models. Descriptive analysis was used for ZI success, prosthesis success and patient reported outcome measures.

RESULTS

Five hundred and seventy-four titles were identified, of which 18 met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies included 1349 ZIs in 623 patients. Mean follow-up period was 75.4 months (range 36-141.6). The mean survival of ZIs was 96.2% [95% CI: 93.8; 97.7] at 6 years. Mean survival for delayed loading was 95% [95% CI: 91.7; 97.1] and 98.1% [95% CI: 96.2; 99.0] for immediate loading (p = 0.03). Annual incidence rate of ZI failure was 0.7% [95% CI 0.4; 1.0]. Mean ZI success was 95.7% [95% CI 87.8; 98.6]. Mean prosthesis survival was 94% [95% CI 88.6; 96.9]. Sinusitis prevalence was 14.2% [95% CI 8.8; 22.0] at 5 years. Patients' reported increased satisfaction with ZIs.

CONCLUSIONS

ZIs have long-term survival comparable to conventional implants. Immediate loading showed a statistically significant increase in survival over delayed loading. Prosthesis survival was similar to that of prostheses supported by conventional implants, with similar complications. Sinusitis was the most frequently encountered biological complication. Patients reported improved outcome measures with ZI use.

Indications for zygomatic implants: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the evidence regarding the indications for placement of zygomatic implants to rehabilitate edentulous maxillae.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A focused question using the PIO format was developed, questioning "in patients in need of an implant-supported rehabilitation of the edentulous maxillae, what are the indications for the use of zygomatic implants''. The primary information analyzed and collected was a clear description of the indication for the use of zygomatic implants.

RESULTS

A total of 1266 records were identified through database searching. The full-text review was conducted for 117 papers, and 10 were selected to be included in this review. Zygomatic implant indications were extreme bone atrophy or deficiency secondary to different factors. The quad zygoma concept (two zygomatic implants bilaterally placed and splinted) was applied to 107 patients, the classic zygoma concept (one zygomatic implant bilaterally placed and splinted to standard anterior implants) was used in 88 patients, and the unilateral concept (one zygomatic implant on one side, splinted with one or more conventional implants) was employed in 14 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The main indication for the use of zygomatic implants was considered extreme maxillary bone atrophy, resulting from many factors. The clear definition of what was considered "extreme bone atrophy" is not uniquely defined in each paper. Further studies are needed to develop clear indications for zygomatic implants.

Guided Zygomatic Implantology for Oral Cancer Rehabilitation: A Case Report

Oral rehabilitation after maxillary oncological resection is challenging. This case report presents the rehabilitation of a 65-year-old Caucasian male adenoid cystic carcinoma patient using a myo-cutaneous thigh flap, zygomatic implant placement, and an immediate fixed provisional prosthesis made with computer-aided technologies. The patient presented complaints of asymptomatic enlarged swelling of 5-mm on the right hard hemi-palate. There was an oro-antral communication deriving from a previous local excision. Preoperative radiographs showed the involvement of the right maxilla, maxillary sinus, and nose with a suspect involvement of the maxillary division of the trigeminal nerve. Treatment was planned through a fully digital workflow. A partial maxillectomy was performed endoscopically, and maxilla was reconstructed using an anterolateral thigh free flap. Two zygomatic implants were inserted simultaneously. A provisional fix full-arch prosthesis was manufactured preoperatively through a fully digital workflow and was placed in the operating room. Following post-operative radiotherapy, the patient received a final hybrid prosthesis. During the follow-up period of two years, the patient reported good function, aesthetics, and significant enhancement in quality of life. According to the results of this case, the protocol represented can be a promising alternative for oral cancer patients with large defects, and can lead to an improved quality of life.

Changing trends in the microvascular reconstruction and oral rehabilitation following maxillary cancer

Purpose

The maxillectomy defect is complex and the best means to achieve optimal reconstruction, and dental rehabilitation is a source of debate. The refinements in zygomatic implant techniques have altered the means and speed by which rehabilitation can be achieved and has also influenced the choice regarding ideal flap reconstruction. The aim of this study is to report on how the method of reconstruction and oral rehabilitation of the maxilla has changed since 1994 in our Institution, and to reflect on case mix and survival.

Methods

Consecutive head and neck oncology cases involving maxillary resections over a 27-year period between January 1994 and November 2020 were identified from hospital records and previous studies. Case note review focussed on clinical characteristics, reconstruction, prosthetic rehabilitation, and survival.

Results

There were 186 patients and the tumour sites were: alveolus for 56% (104), hard palate for 19% (35), maxillary sinus for 18% (34) and nasal for 7% (13). 52% (97) were Brown class 2 defects. Forty-five patients were managed by obturation and 78% (142/183) had free tissue transfer. The main flaps used were radial (52), anterolateral thigh (27), DCIA (22), scapula (13) and fibula (11). There were significant changes over time regarding reconstruction type, use of primary implants, type of dental restoration, and length of hospital stay. Overall survival after 24 months was 64% (SE 4%) and after 60 months was 42% (SE 4%).

Conclusion

These data reflect a shift in the reconstruction of the maxillary defect afforded by the utilisation of zygomatic implants.