Literature DB >> 25784187

Recommendations for implant-retained nasal prostheses after ablative tumor surgery: Minimal surgical aftercare, high implant survival, and satisfied patients.

Anke Korfage1, Gerry M Raghoebar1, Willem D Noorda1, Boudewijn E Plaat2, Arjan Vissink1, Anita Visser1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nasal defects resulting from tumor resection are preferably rehabilitated with implant-retained nasal prostheses. Aftercare, clinical outcome of the implants, and patients' satisfaction with implant-retained nasal prostheses were assessed.
METHODS: Twenty-eight consecutive patients needing total rhinectomy because of tumor resection between 1998 and 2013 were treated according to a standardized protocol with 2 implants in the nasal floor. Surgical and prosthetic aftercare was scored using patient records. Finally in 2014, skin reaction, peri-implant bone loss, and patients' satisfaction were assessed in all 13 still living patients.
RESULTS: In total, 56 implants were inserted (median follow-up, 35.1 months; interquartile range [IQR], 8.9-63.3). Implant survival was 96.4%. Implant survival was independent of radiotherapy. Peri-implant skin was healthy and patients' satisfaction high. Longevity of the prostheses was limited.
CONCLUSION: Rehabilitation of nasal defects resulting from total rhinectomy with implant-retained nasal prostheses, according to our protocol, resulted in high patient satisfaction and favorable treatment outcome.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: E-E, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aftercare; dental implants; facial defects; head and neck oncology; nasal prosthesis

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25784187     DOI: 10.1002/hed.24053

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


  5 in total

1.  Epithetic nasal reconstruction for nasal carcinoma: retrospective analysis on 22 patients.

Authors:  Giorgos Papaspyrou; Bernhard Schick; Mathias Schneider; Basel Al Kadah
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Prosthetic management of patients with oro-maxillo-facial defects: a long-term follow-up retrospective study.

Authors:  G Gastaldi; L Palumbo; C Moreschi; E F Gherlone; P Capparé
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2017-11-30

3.  [Optimized fitting of a midface implant to anchor a magnetic nasal prosthesis using 3D printing].

Authors:  Christian Wrobel; Daniel Keppeler; Alexander C Meyer
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2021-08-31       Impact factor: 1.284

4.  A practical approach to orofacial rehabilitation in a patient after inferior maxillectomy and rhinectomy with mono framework construction supported on a zygomatic implant placed in the glabella: a case report.

Authors:  Vivek Gaur; S Mahendra Perumal; Faizur Rahmaan; Łukasz Pałka
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2021-07-13

Review 5.  Outcome measures in facial prosthesis research: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rachael Y Jablonski; Benjamin J Veale; Trevor J Coward; Andrew J Keeling; Chris Bojke; Sue H Pavitt; Brian R Nattress
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 3.426

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.