Postsurgical care for rehabilitation with implant-retained extraoral prostheses

Prosthodontic Considerations in Post-cancer Reconstructions

The restoration of function after oncologic surgery of the oral cavity constitutes one of the major challenges facing head and neck oncology. Within the general objective of securing esthetic as well as functional reconstructions, dental rehabilitation is crucial for achieving a good outcome. Adequate dental rehabilitation allows the patient to chew food and considerably improves speech and swallowing. These reconstructions will be driven biologically or prosthetically following surgical design and outcome.

Soft Tissue Response and Survival of Extraoral Implants: A Long-Term Follow-up

Maxillofacial defects may be reconstructed by plastic surgery or treated by prosthetic mean rehabilitation. In case of large defects, prosthetic rehabilitation rather than surgical reconstruction is preferred due to the insufficient esthetic results of surgical interventions. However, retention of the craniofacial prosthesis is a great problem despite the satisfactory esthetic results. With the presentation of extraoral implants, the retention of maxillofacial prostheses was improved, and osseointegrated craniofacial implants have become indispensable for retention and stability. However, there are conflicting results regarding the success rates of osseointegrated implants used at the craniofacial region. A total of 24 patients with 64 implants (30 in auricular region of 13 patients, 24 in nasal region of 8 patients, and 10 in orbital region of 3 patients) ranging in age from 16 to 83 years (mean age = 45.45 years) were evaluated. One patient among 13 patients (1/13) has lost his implants in the auricular area, 1 patient among 8 patients (1/8) lost his implants, and 1 patient among 3 patients (1/3) has lost all of her implants. Peri-implant soft tissue response was evaluated for a 60-month period and a total of 654 visits/sites recorded. Grade 0 (no irritation) was present in 72.8% (476/654) of the visits/sites. Grade 1 (slight redness) was observed for 18.8% (123/654). Grade 2 (red and slightly moist tissue) was scored in 6.9% (45/654). Grade 3 (red and slightly moist tissue with granulation) was noted in 1.5% (10/654) and grade 4 (infection) could not be found. Ossseointegrated implants provide reasonable support and show successful results when used with maxillofacial prostheses.

The Clinical Outcome of Dental Implants Placed through Skin Flaps

Objective and Study Design

The incidence of peri-implantitis, marginal bone loss, implant success, and survival rates of 52 dental implants placed through the skin paddle and 23 implants through the neighboring gingiva were investigated. Mixed linear model was adopted to analyze the influence of radiation and skin paddle on marginal bone loss and peri-implantitis.

Results

The incidence of peri-implantitis in implants placed through the skin flaps was higher (32.7%) than that of implants placed through the oral mucosa (8.7%). According to the mixed linear analysis, no significant difference in the amount of marginal bone loss was observed between the 2 groups: implants placed through the skin graft had marginal bone loss of 0.39 ± 0.14 mm at 1 year and 0.50 ± 0.23 mm at 5 years, and implants placed through the oral mucosa had marginal bone loss of 0.32 ± 0.12 mm and 0.52 ± 0.21 mm at the same time intervals. The 1-year and 2- to 5-year cumulative survival rates of the implants placed through the skin were 100% and 98%, respectively, and those of implants placed through the oral mucosa were both 95.65%. The 1-year and 2- to 5-year cumulative success rates of the implants placed through the skin were 92.30% and 79.38%, respectively, and those of implants placed through the oral mucosa were 91.30% and 82.59%, respectively.

Conclusion

Implants can be successfully placed and maintained in lining defects covered with a skin paddle; hence, this treatment modality may be considered reasonable and reliable for the functional and aesthetic rehabilitation of patients with oromaxillofacial reconstructions.

Implant-retained finger prosthesis with modified retention system

BACKGROUND

Amputations affect both the physical and the psychological aspects of an individual, causing significant impact on self-esteem. The main causes of finger amputations are work-related accidents with dangerous machinery, road traffic accidents, and animal bites, as well as systemic diseases such as diabetes. This report aims to describe a simple technique for fabrication of implant-retained finger prosthesis with a modified base of the retention system.

CASE DESCRIPTION AND METHODS

The O-Ring retention system was used with a modified hexagon-shaped base and a metallic capsule adapted to the acrylic resin to attach the prosthesis to the implant.

FINDINGS AND OUTCOMES

The prosthesis was made with silicone, and after osseointegration, it was installed without complications, leading to a patient satisfied with the end result and encouraged to return to social life.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Restoring self-esteem in the patient and static and functional rehabilitation.

Patients' satisfaction after surgical facial reconstruction or after rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis

The matching of the aesthetic, functional, and psychosocial results of a facial deformity may produce devastating effects in its carriers, especially if the lesion is extensive or the treatment is aggressive. Because of this, the objective of the present article was to evaluate patient's satisfaction rating after surgical facial reconstruction or rehabilitation with oral and maxillofacial prosthesis, by means of reviewing the literature.