Masticatory efficiency of implant-supported removable partial dental prostheses in patients with free fibula flap reconstructed mandibles: A split-mouth, observational study

One-stage prosthodontically driven jaw reconstruction in patients with benign and malignant pathologies: A 7- to 11-year cohort study

OBJECTIVES

One stage functional jaw reconstruction is defined as the resection and reconstruction of segmental defects in conjunction with the placement of dental implants in an ideal prosthetic position and loaded with a provisional restoration, during one surgical procedure. The aim of the study is to describe clinical outcomes of patients who underwent one stage functional jaw reconstruction.

METHODS

Patients who underwent one-stage functional jaw reconstruction, from January 2013 to March 2016 were recalled in 2022 and 2023. Planning and execution for the reconstruction utilized either analogue or digital techniques. Outcome parameters recorded were treatment-related outcomes at patient level, implant-related outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients underwent one-stage jaw reconstruction with a total of 57 implants. Four patients had maxillary and 14 had mandibular reconstructions. Ten patients underwent postoperative radiotherapy. Ten patients were planned using analogue and eight by digital planning. Three patients had partial flap necrosis, three patients had plate fractures, implant loss was seen in one patient and four patients died during the period. A functional prosthesis was provided in 16 out of the 18 patients.

CONCLUSION

One-stage functional jaw reconstruction is a predictable method for providing rehabilitation with successful outcomes at 7-11 years. However, caution should be exercised when the treatment modality is carried out in patients with malignant pathologies who have undergone radiotherapy.

Long-term survival and success rate of dental implants placed in reconstructed areas with extraoral autogenous bone grafts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term survival and success rates of implants placed in reconstructed areas using microvascularized or non-microvascularized extraoral bone grafts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed in five databases and in gray literature for articles published until June, 2023. The eligibility criteria comprised observational studies (prospective or retrospective) and clinical trials, reporting survival and success rates of implants placed in extraoral bone grafts. A meta-analysis (implant failure) was categorized into subgroups based on the type of bone graft used. The risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up time was 92 months. The summary estimate of survival rate at the implant level were 94.9% (CI: 90.1%-97.4%) for non-vascularized iliac graft, 96.5% (CI: 91.4%-98.6%) for non-vascularized calvaria graft, and 92.3% (CI: 89.1%-94.6%) for vascularized fibula graft. The mean success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) were 83.2%; 2.25 mm, 92.2%; 0.93 mm, and 87.6%; 1.49 mm, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Implants placed in areas reconstructed using extraoral autogenous bone graft have high long-term survival rates and low long-term MBLs. The data did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in the survival, success, or MBL of grafts from different donor areas or with different vascularization. This systematic review was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202390004.

Prediction of jaw opening function after mandibular reconstruction using subject-specific musculoskeletal modelling

BACKGROUND

Mandibular reconstruction patients often suffer abnormalities in the mandibular kinematics. In silico simulations, such as musculoskeletal modelling, can be used to predict post-operative mandibular kinematics. It is important to validate the mandibular musculoskeletal model and analyse the factors influencing its accuracy.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the jaw opening-closing movements after mandibular reconstruction, as predicted by the subject-specific musculoskeletal model, and the factors influencing its accuracy.

METHODS

Ten mandibular reconstruction patients were enrolled in this study. Cone-beam computed tomography images, mandibular movements, and surface electromyogram signals were recorded preoperatively. A subject-specific mandibular musculoskeletal model was established to predict surgical outcomes using patient-averaged muscle parameter changes as model inputs. Jaw bone geometry was replaced by surgical planning results, and the muscle insertion sites were registered based on the non-rigid iterative closest point method. The predicted jaw kinematic data were validated based on 6-month post-operative measurements. Correlations between the prediction accuracy and patient characteristics (age, pathology and surgical scope) were further analysed.

RESULTS

The root mean square error (RMSE) for lower incisor displacement was 31.4%, and the error for peak magnitude of jaw opening was 4.9 mm. Age, post-operative infection and radiotherapy influenced the prediction accuracy. The amount of masseter detachment showed little correlation with jaw opening.

CONCLUSION

The mandibular musculoskeletal model successfully predicted short-range jaw opening functions after mandibular reconstruction. It provides a novel surgical planning method to predict the risk of developing trismus.

Long-Term Outcomes of Dental Rehabilitation and Quality of Life after Microvascular Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction in Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

Background/Objectives: Dental rehabilitation after extended tumour resection and jaw reconstruction is challenging. The present study aimed to report the prosthetic outcome and quality of life (QoL) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) after microvascular alveolar ridge reconstruction. Methods: The prosthetic outcomes of all consecutive patients with HNC who underwent microvascular alveolar ridge reconstruction at the University Hospital Salzburg between 2011 and 2018 were investigated. Oral health-related QoL (OHrQoL) and overall QoL were assessed using the validated Oral Health Impact Profile-49 (OHIP-49) and Short Form-36 questionnaires. Results: During the study period, 115 consecutive patients with head and neck cancer underwent microvascular jaw reconstruction. Among them, 23.3% and 27.4% received conventional tissue-borne prostheses and implant-supported prostheses, respectively, while 48.7% did not undergo dental rehabilitation. The prosthetic outcome was not associated with tumour stage (p = 0.32). Oral health-related quality of life (OHrQoL) was best in patients with implant-supported dental rehabilitation (OHIP-49 median score = 7) and worst in those with conventional removable dentures (OHIP-49 median score = 54). The corresponding OHIP-49 median score for patients who could not undergo dental rehabilitation was 30.5. All Short Form-36 subscale scores were equal to or higher than the malignancy norm scores. Conclusions: After microvascular jaw reconstruction, approximately one-third of the HNC patients received adequate implant-supported dental rehabilitation. However, the risk of dental rehabilitation failure was 50%. The different prosthetic outcomes affected OHrQoL, but not overall QoL.

Digitally designed stent-assisted soft-tissue management after jaw reconstruction: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

A digitally designed stent was invented to assist vestibuloplasty and free gingival graft (FGG) after jaw reconstruction. This study aimed to compare the effects of conventional soft-tissue management comprising vestibuloplasty combined with FGG and modified soft-tissue management using a digitally designed stent on the vestibular sulcus depth (VD), keratinised-tissue width (KTW) and peri-implant tissue health in patients undergoing jaw reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective cohort study enrolled patients who underwent jaw reconstruction using a fibular flap, iliac flap, or onlay bone graft followed by implant-supported rehabilitation at the Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology between May 2019 and July 2022. Patients in the stent group received digitally designed stents following vestibuloplasty combined with FGG for peri-implant soft-tissue management. Patients in the control group underwent a conventional vestibuloplasty combined with FGG. VD and KTW were evaluated immediately after implant loading (T2) and 1 year after implant loading (T3), and the atrophy rates of VD and KTW were calculated. Peri-implant clinical parameters were evaluated at T3. Comparisons between the groups were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. The effects of age, sex, primary disease, reconstruction type, reconstructed jaw and the number and location of implants on VD and KTW were evaluated using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the atrophy rates of VD and KTW between the stent and control groups at T2 and T3 (both P ≥ 0.05). There were no significant differences in peri-implant clinical parameters between the stent and control groups at T3 (P ≥ 0.05). Reconstruction type, location of implants and primary disease influenced VD, and reconstruction type and age influenced KTW.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the maintenance of VD and KTW after jaw reconstruction between soft-tissue management using a digitally designed stent and the conventional method. Further, digitally designed stents do not affect peri-implant tissue health.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Digitally designed stents can simplify clinical procedures without adverse effects on peri-implant tissue health, but they do not promote keratinized mucosa augmentation and vestibuloplasty.

Mastication in health-related quality of life in patients treated for oral cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Treatment for oral cancer can impair oral functions such as mastication, which may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). In this review, an overview is provided of masticatory ability in patients treated for oral cancer.

METHODS

The PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for scientific literature on masticatory ability in relation to QoL in patients treated for oral cancer. Studies were included when oral cancer treatment was provided, and the University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QoL) questionnaire was used. Risk of bias (MINORS) was independently assessed by two authors.

RESULTS

The PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase and Cochrane search yielded 575 unique records of which 111 were assessed full text, and 27 studies were included. The UW-QoL mastication scores ranged from 31.9 to 97.4. There was a wide variety in methodology, patient groups, tumour site, treatment and assessment moment, to such a degree that outcome scores are difficult to compare.

CONCLUSION

The wide variety in studies exploring health-related QoL in relation to mastication in oral cancer patients prevents the identification of possible relations between treatment, masticatory ability and QoL. Our findings underline the limitations in currently available literature and indicate the necessity for more comparable research.

Long-term survival of implant-based oral rehabilitation following maxillofacial reconstruction with vascularized bone flap

Aim

The aim of the study was to assess the 5-year cumulative survival rate of implant-based dental rehabilitation following maxillofacial reconstruction with a vascularized bone flap and to investigate the potential risk factors which might influence the survival rate.

Materials and methods

A retrospective cohort study was designed. Inclusion criteria involved 18 years old or above patients with the availability of clinical and radiological data and a minimum follow-up 1 year following implant placement. The cumulative survival rate was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier curves and the influential risk factors were assessed using univariate log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression analysis.

Results

151 implants were assessed in 40 patients with a mean age of 56.43 ± 15.28 years at the time of implantation. The mean number of implants placed per patient was 3.8 ± 1.3 with a follow-up period of 50.0 ± 32.0 months. The cumulative survival at 1-, 2- and 5-years was 96%, 87%, and 81%. Patients with systemic diseases (HR = 3.75, 95% CI 1.65–8.52; p = 0.002), irradiated flap (HR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.00–5.17; p = 0.05) and poor oral hygiene (HR = 11.67; 95% CI 4.56–29.88; p < 0.0001) were at a significantly higher risk of implant failure.

Conclusion

The cumulative implant survival rate was highest at 1st year followed by 2nd and 5th year, indicating that the risk of implant failure increased over time. Risk indicators that seem to be detrimental to long-term survival include poor oral hygiene, irradiated flap and systemic diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-022-00413-7.

Masticatory performance in patients undergoing free fibula flap for mandible reconstruction

Background

To explore the masticatory performance in patients undergoing an osteo(cutaneous) free fibula (OFF) flap for mandible reconstruction by a prospective design.

Methods

A total of 56 patients who had undergone OFF flap reconstructions for mandibular reconstruction secondary to malignant (squamous cell carcinoma) or benign (ameloblastoma) tumor resection were prospectively enrolled. They were asked to complete the masticatory performance test by the weigh method and the chew domain of the University of Washington quality of life questionnaire (version 4) preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. The pair nonparametric test was used to analyze the dynamic change of masticatory performance and subjective chew function.

Results

Fifty-one patients were included for analysis finally. The mean masticatory performance for patients with malignant tumors were 53.4% ± 10.3%, 36.4% ± 10.3%, 42.6% ± 9.6%, 52.8% ± 10.9%, and 53.1% ± 11.8% preoperatively, at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively, respectively. Compared with the preoperative level, the masticatory performance had a significant reduction immediately after surgery (p < 0.001), followed by a return to the baseline level within three months. A similar trend was noted for those with benign tumors. The mean score of chew domain for patients with malignant tumors were 100 ± 0, 54.3 ± 32.9, 81.4 ± 24.5, and 92.9 ± 17.8 preoperatively, at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively, respectively. Compared with the preoperative level, the subjective chew function was greatly affected within the first three months (p < 0.001), and it gradually recovered to the baseline level in the following nine months. A similar trend was noted in patients with benign tumors.

Conclusions

The masticatory performance and subjective chew function was significantly affected after OFF flap reconstructions in the short term, but both recovered to the preoperative levels within 9–12 months.

Osseointegrated implant survival, success and prosthodontic outcomes in composite free flaps: A 10-year retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate implant survival, success and prosthodontic outcomes in a variety of composite free flaps.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patient records was used for data collection of implants placed into flaps. Free flap donor sites included fibula, iliac crest, scapula, medial femoral condyle and radial forearm. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate survival. Cox regression was used to assess variables affecting survival, and binary logistic regression was utilised to determine effect of variables on prosthodontic outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 150 implants placed into 45 fibula, 98 implants into 29 iliac crest, 62 implants into 22 scapula, 6 implants into 3 medial femoral condyle and 2 implants in radial forearm composite free flaps. There was no difference in survival or success between or within the various flaps. Active smoking, increasing age, male gender and radiotherapy were associated with implant failure. Of patients completing prosthodontic rehabilitation, 93% were successful. There was no difference in likelihood of failure between different flap types. Fixed implant-supported dentures were associated with poor oral hygiene compared with removable designs (OR2.9, 95%CI 1.1-7.8, p = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

There is adequate survival and success of implants in common flaps. Caution is required when planning implants in patients exposed to radiotherapy and smokers. Ability to maintain adequate oral hygiene is an important prosthetic design consideration.

Long-term outcomes of implant-based dental rehabilitation in head and neck cancer patients after reconstruction with the free vascularized fibula flap

The study aimed at evaluating, comprehensively, implant-based dental rehabilitation in head and neck cancer patients after maxillofacial reconstruction with a vascularized free fibula flap (FFF). Data were obtained by retrospectively reviewing the medical records of patients treated in Amsterdam UMC-VU Medical Center. Dental implant survival and implant success according to the Albrektsson criteria were analyzed. Additionally, prosthetic-related outcomes were studied, with a focus on functional dental rehabilitation. In total, 161 implants were placed in FFFs, with a mean follow-up of 4.9 years (range 0.2-23.4). Implant survival was 55.3% in irradiated FFFs and 96% in non-irradiated FFFs. Significant predictors for implant failure were tobacco use and irradiation of the FFF. Implant success was 40.4% in irradiated FFFs and 61.4% in non-irradiated FFFs, mainly due to implant failure and non-functional implants. Implant-based dental rehabilitation was started 45 times in 42 patients, out of 161 FFF reconstructions (27.9%). Thirty-seven patients completed the dental rehabilitation, 29 of whom achieved functional rehabilitation. Irradiation of the FFF negatively influenced attainment of functional rehabilitation. For patients with functional rehabilitation, the body mass index varied at different timepoints: FFF reconstruction, 24.6; dental implantation 23.5; and after placing dental prosthesis, 23.9. Functional implant-based dental rehabilitation, if started, can be achieved in the majority of head and neck cancer patients after FFF reconstruction. Actively smoking patients with an irradiated FFF should be clearly informed about the increased risk for implant and prosthetic treatment failure.

Soft Tissue Management: A Critical Part of Implant Rehabilitation After Vascularized Free-Flap Reconstruction

PURPOSE

Implant rehabilitation after jaw reconstruction is challenging, and postoperative peri-implantitis is common. Our aim was to present our management protocol for implant rehabilitation after vascularized free-flap reconstruction and report the outcomes of soft tissue management.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients who received vascularized free-flap reconstruction, implant rehabilitation, apical reposition flaps (ARFs), and free gingival grafts (FGGs) at Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2020. We assessed the association of age, gender, primary disease, flap choice, number and position of implants, timing of ARFs and FGGs, fixation stent use, and restoration type with the occurrence of peri-implantitis. Probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, and marginal bone loss of the implants were measured as well. The data were analyzed by descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier statistics, and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 19 patients with 65 implants were included. The implants were placed immediately or 7 to 44 months after reconstruction of the jaw with fibular (n = 17) or iliac flaps (n = 2). ARFs and FGGs were performed 0 to 11 months later. No implants were lost. The mean probing pocket depth, bleeding on probing, and marginal bone loss at 26.6 ± 16.8 months were 3.5 ± 0.9 mm, 70.4 ± 35.1%, and 0.6 ± 0.4 mm, respectively. The incidence of peri-implantitis was 32.3%, showing no significant associations with the gender, age, primary disease, flap choice, number and position of implants, timing of ARFs and FGGs, use of a fixation stent, and type of restoration based on the adjusted multivariate model (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Soft tissue management helps generate firmly attached keratinized mucosa around the implants, leads to a more precise impression, and reduces peri-implant bone loss. It should be considered as a critical part of implant rehabilitation after vascularized free-flap reconstruction.

Prosthodontic rehabilitation of head and neck cancer patients-Challenges and new developments

Head and neck cancer treatment can severely alter oral function and aesthetics, and reduce quality of life. The role of maxillofacial prosthodontists in multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancer patients is essential when it comes to oral rehabilitation and its planning. This role should preferably start on the day of first intake. Maxillofacial prosthodontists should be involved in the care pathway to shape and outline the prosthetic and dental rehabilitation in line with the reconstructive surgical options. With the progress of three‐dimensional technology, the pretreatment insight in overall prognosis and possibilities of surgical and/or prosthetic rehabilitation has tremendously increased. This increased insight has helped to improve quality of cancer care. This expert review addresses the involvement of maxillofacial prosthodontists in treatment planning, highlighting prosthodontic rehabilitation of head and neck cancer patients from start to finish.