Implant prognosis in irradiated versus non-irradiated nasal, orbital and auricular sites

LIMITED EVIDENCE SUGGESTS IMPLANT PLACEMENT IS A VIABLE OPTION IN IRRADIATED HEAD AND NECK CANCER PATIENTS

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Schiegnitz E, Reinicke K, Sagheb K, König J, Al-Nawas B, Grötz KA. Dental implants in patients with head and neck cancer-A systematic review and meta-analysis of the influence of radiotherapy on implant survival. Clinical oral implants research. 2022 Oct;33(10):967-99.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

Open access funding enabled by Project DEAL.

TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis of data (SRMA).

Salvage Strategies for Local Recurrences of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Nasal Vestibule: A Single-Center Experience of 22 Years

Squamous cell carcinomas of the nasal vestibule are an extremely rare neoplastic disease. Although brachytherapy is gaining popularity for primary treatment, surgery remains the best option in case of recurrences. The aim of this paper is to outline our treatment experience of local recurrence of SCCNVs over the past 22 years. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of the patients who underwent surgical treatment for local recurrence of SCCNV: data regarding age, sex, primary tumor treatment, recurrence location and time of appearance, surgical resection, type of reconstruction, postoperative complication, surgical revision, and re-recurrence rate were analyzed. Twenty patients were included in the study. The median period for recurrence appearance was 17 months, and the prevalent location of recurrence was the nasal alae. Prevalent reconstructive procedures were the nasolabial flap and paramedian forehead flap. No postoperative complications were observed, and one case of re-recurrence was detected at 12-months of follow-up. Based on our experience, salvage surgical procedures for SCCNV recurrences must be individualized and carefully planned, taking into account the peculiar pattern of tumor spread and the presence of scar and heavily radiotherapy damaged tissue from previous treatment; delayed reconstruction should be considered for all the cases with skeletal involvement.

The Latest Craniofacial Reconstructive Techniques Using Anchored Implants after Surgical Treatment of Nasal and Paranasal Sinuses Tumors

Reconstructive surgery after surgical treatment of neoplasms in the head and neck region is always a challenge. Many factors are responsible for the success of reconstruction. The anatomy of the facial region is complex, which significantly influences the aesthetic effect of the reconstruction. Moreover, many patients undergo postoperative radiotherapy after surgical treatment, which affects the range of reconstructive techniques. The aim of this study is to review current reconstructive methods in the craniofacial region, using bone-anchored implants to attach nasal prostheses. The article also comprises the authors' own experience with successful single-stage, Vistafix 3 osseointegrated implants for the attachment of an external nasal prosthesis in a 51-year-old man after surgical removal of squamous cell carcinoma of the nose and paranasal sinuses. The literature search for articles regarding implants in craniofacial reconstructions was performed using the three following databases: Scopus, Web of Science and MEDLINE (through PubMed), and follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement (PRISMA). A systematic literature search was set for 2018-2023 and retrieved 92 studies. From them, 18 articles were included in the review.

Outcome of implants placed to retain craniofacial prostheses - A retrospective cohort study with a follow-up of up to 30 years

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively assess the treatment outcomes of endosseous implants placed to retain craniofacial prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with craniofacial defects resulting from congenital disease, trauma, or oncologic treatment had implant retained prostheses placed in the mastoid, orbital, or nasal region and then assessed over a period of up to 30 years. Implant survival rates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Clinical assessments consisted of scoring skin reactions under the prosthesis and the peri-implant skin reactions. Possible risk factors for implant loss were identified. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a 10-point VAS-scale.

RESULTS

A total of 525 implants placed in 201 patients were included. The median follow up was 71 months (IQR 28-174 months). Implants placed in the mastoid and nasal region showed the highest overall implant survival rates (10-year implant survival rates of 93.7% and 92.5%, respectively), while the orbital implants had the lowest overall survival rate (84.2%). Radiotherapy was a significant risk factor for implant loss (HR 3.14, p < 0.001). No differences in implant loss were found between pre- and post-operative radiotherapy (p = 0.89). Soft tissue problems were not frequently encountered, and the patients were highly satisfied with their implant-retained prosthesis.

CONCLUSION

Implants used to retain craniofacial prostheses have high survival and patient satisfaction rates and can thus be considered as a predictable treatment option. Radiation is the most important risk factor for implant loss.