OBJECTIVES: Conventional prosthesis is generally inapplicable following reconstruction with free fibula flaps (FFF) due to impaired bone and soft tissue conditions, and rehabilitation via enossal implants in FFF is relatively novel. This retrospective study aimed to document the surgical aspects of this option and to describe related supplementary procedures that can help optimise the definitive outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred nineteen implants were inserted within FFFs in 37 patients (mean age 51.8 ± 10.6 years), who underwent ablative surgery of the maxilla (3) and mandible (34). In a cross-sectional study design with a follow-up period of 3-172 months, we analysed types and configurations of graft design, patterns of implant insertion and methods for prosthetic rehabilitation as well as primary stability and survival rate. RESULTS: Most patients underwent jaw reconstruction using a mono-barrel FFF (14 osseous and 18 osteocutaneous/osteomyocutaneous); three patients received double-barrel reconstruction of the mandible. Three patients with maxillary defects were reconstructed using mono-barrel grafts (one osteocutaneous and two prefabricated grafts). Pre-prosthetic procedures were required in 23 patients to optimise conditions in the peri-implant soft tissue. Iliac bone onlay graft was used in six patients to achieve appropriate vertical height in mono-barrel grafts. A total of 10 implants in eight patients (five irradiated) could not be loaded. All other implants showed stable osseous integration and satisfactory peri-implant soft tissue conditions. CONCLUSION: Masticatory rehabilitation can be achieved using enossal implants inserted in FFF. Special requirements can be met through selection of an appropriate graft configuration and optimal implant positioning. Supplementary pre-prosthetic procedures are usually required as they improve long-term survival. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This overview provides a reliable and comprehensive algorithm for standard implant-borne rehabilitation of patients with fibula grafts.
OBJECTIVES: Conventional prosthesis is generally inapplicable following reconstruction with free fibula flaps (FFF) due to impaired bone and soft tissue conditions, and rehabilitation via enossal implants in FFF is relatively novel. This retrospective study aimed to document the surgical aspects of this option and to describe related supplementary procedures that can help optimise the definitive outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred nineteen implants were inserted within FFFs in 37 patients (mean age 51.8 ± 10.6 years), who underwent ablative surgery of the maxilla (3) and mandible (34). In a cross-sectional study design with a follow-up period of 3-172 months, we analysed types and configurations of graft design, patterns of implant insertion and methods for prosthetic rehabilitation as well as primary stability and survival rate. RESULTS: Most patients underwent jaw reconstruction using a mono-barrel FFF (14 osseous and 18 osteocutaneous/osteomyocutaneous); three patients received double-barrel reconstruction of the mandible. Three patients with maxillary defects were reconstructed using mono-barrel grafts (one osteocutaneous and two prefabricated grafts). Pre-prosthetic procedures were required in 23 patients to optimise conditions in the peri-implant soft tissue. Iliac bone onlay graft was used in six patients to achieve appropriate vertical height in mono-barrel grafts. A total of 10 implants in eight patients (five irradiated) could not be loaded. All other implants showed stable osseous integration and satisfactory peri-implant soft tissue conditions. CONCLUSION: Masticatory rehabilitation can be achieved using enossal implants inserted in FFF. Special requirements can be met through selection of an appropriate graft configuration and optimal implant positioning. Supplementary pre-prosthetic procedures are usually required as they improve long-term survival. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This overview provides a reliable and comprehensive algorithm for standard implant-borne rehabilitation of patients with fibula grafts.
Authors: D D Jewer; J B Boyd; R T Manktelow; R M Zuker; I B Rosen; P J Gullane; L E Rotstein; J E Freeman Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 1989-09 Impact factor: 4.730