Literature DB >> 15880417

Oral rehabilitation after treatment for head and neck malignancy.

Richard J Shaw1, A Finlay Sutton, John I Cawood, Robert A Howell, Derek Lowe, James S Brown, Simon N Rogers, E David Vaughan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advances in the management of oral malignancy have resulted in significant improvements in survival and functional outcome. Ablation of oral tissues and radiotherapy render many patients unable to wear conventional prostheses, and these patients are, thus, candidates for oral rehabilitation with osseointegrated implants. We aim to present outcomes and complications of such treatment over a 14-year period in a single unit.
METHODS: Data were collected for 81 consecutive patients, most of whom had received microvascular free flap reconstruction after surgical ablation of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Three hundred eighty-six implants were placed after a delay of 12 months after surgery. Sixty-five percent of implants were placed in the anterior mandible. Radiotherapy was used in 47% of the patients, and hyperbaric oxygen treatment was routinely used in irradiated subjects during the latter half of the series. Retrospective analysis of implants and prostheses was made by use of case notes, radiographs, and a computerized database.
RESULTS: Data are presented for 364 of the 386 implants in 77 of the 81 patients after a median follow-up of 4 years. Two hundred sixty-five (73%) of the implants were in function supporting prostheses, 56 (15%) had been lost, and 43 (12%) were present but not loaded (ie, "sleepers"). Implant loss seemed patient specific and was also correlated with host bone type. Thirteen percent of patients in whom implants were placed in the mandible lost at least one implant, and the equivalent values for the maxilla was 40%. Thirty-six percent of patients in whom implants were placed in bone graft or flap lost at least one implant. The effects of implant manufacture, dimensions, radiotherapy, and hyperbaric oxygen did not reach statistical significance in this series. Cases of a second primary malignancy were noteworthy; however, the impact of recurrence was minimized by the delay between resection and rehabilitation. Of the 42 fixed and 29 removable prostheses fitted, 12 (17%) failed.
CONCLUSIONS: Implants placed in mandible were reliable, but failure rates in vascularized bone graft and maxilla were higher. Radiotherapy did not seem to prejudice implant survival, and hyperbaric oxygen had no demonstrable benefit in this series. Despite some persistent soft tissue problems and implant loss, most patients reached a successful prosthetic and functional outcome. (c) 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15880417     DOI: 10.1002/hed.20176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Head Neck        ISSN: 1043-3074            Impact factor:   3.147


  16 in total

1.  Humanism in Rehabilitation: A Heartwarming Triumph.

Authors:  Shital Jalandar Sonune; Shankar Pandharinath Dange
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-02-01

Review 2.  Mandibular Reconstruction: Overview.

Authors:  Batchu Pavan Kumar; V Venkatesh; K A Jeevan Kumar; B Yashwanth Yadav; S Ram Mohan
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2015-04-19

3.  Oral rehabilitation for patients with marginal and segmental mandibulectomy: A retrospective review of 111 mandibular resection prostheses.

Authors:  Ivana Petrovic; Zain Uddin Ahmed; Joseph M Huryn; Jonas Nelson; Robert J Allen; Evan Matros; Evan B Rosen
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 3.426

4.  Success of dental implants in patients with large bone defect and analysis of risk factors for implant failure: a non-randomized retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Takumi Hasegawa; Aki Sasaki; Izumi Saito; Satomi Arimoto; Nanae Yatagai; Yujiro Hiraoka; Daisuke Takeda; Yasumasa Kakei; Masaya Akashi
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Clinical performance of different types of dental prosthesis in patients with head and neck tumors-a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Karina Zierden; Juliane Wöstmann; Bernd Wöstmann; Peter Rehmann
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 3.606

6.  Oral squamous cell carcinoma in the vicinity of dental implants.

Authors:  Maximilian Moergel; Julia Karbach; Martin Kunkel; Wilfried Wagner
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-03-16       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  A national survey of consultants, specialists and specialist registrars in restorative dentistry for the assessment and treatment planning of oral cancer patients.

Authors:  K Dewan; R D Kelly; P Bardsley
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.626

8.  Clinical long-term and patient-reported outcomes of dental implants in oral cancer patients.

Authors:  Eik Schiegnitz; Lena Katharina Müller; Keyvan Sagheb; Lisa Theis; Vahide Cagiran; Peer W Kämmerer; Joachim Wegener; Wilfried Wagner; Bilal Al-Nawas
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-13

9.  Smoking, radiotherapy, diabetes and osteoporosis as risk factors for dental implant failure: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hui Chen; Nizhou Liu; Xinchen Xu; Xinhua Qu; Eryi Lu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  The effect of radiotherapy on survival of dental implants in head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Bassam Shugaa-Addin; Hashem-Motahir Al-Shamiri; Sadeq Al-Maweri; Bassel Tarakji
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2016-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.