Hans-Christian Jacobsen1, Falko Wahnschaff2, Thomas Trenkle3, Peter Sieg3, Samer G Hakim3. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Luebeck, Germany. hans-christian.jacobsen@uksh.de. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Jena, Jena, Germany. 3. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Luebeck, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Bony reconstruction of jaw defects using the free fibular flap and dental rehabilitation mostly requires insertion of dental implants within the transferred fibula bone. The aim of this paper was to discuss results of the implant stability with data on the possible benefit for the patient's quality of life after such treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For clinical outcome of implants, we evaluated 26 patients with a total number of 94 dental implants after a follow-up period of 12 to 132 months. A group of 38 patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction with free fibular flap could be included in the life-quality study. Evaluation included 23 patients with and 15 patients without implant-borne restoration. The quality of life was assessed using the standard QLQ C-30 questionnaire and the H&N35 module of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). RESULTS: Of implants, 94.7 % were stable at the time of investigation and could be used for prosthesis. Patients with dental implants reported improvement of life quality along with better scores in most function and symptom scales; however, only values for global health status (QL2), absence of dyspnea (DY) and absence of feeding tube (HNFE) were significantly better than in the control group. CONCLUSION: Dental implant insertion in fibula grafts along with implant-borne restoration is a proven concept and might lead to improved quality of life following ablative surgery of the jaw. The effect on the quality of life is not as predictable as on the implant stability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients with bony defects of the jaw require bony reconstruction. This allows further masticatory rehabilitation using dental implants and might lead to improved quality of life.
OBJECTIVES: Bony reconstruction of jaw defects using the free fibular flap and dental rehabilitation mostly requires insertion of dental implants within the transferred fibula bone. The aim of this paper was to discuss results of the implant stability with data on the possible benefit for the patient's quality of life after such treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For clinical outcome of implants, we evaluated 26 patients with a total number of 94 dental implants after a follow-up period of 12 to 132 months. A group of 38 patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction with free fibular flap could be included in the life-quality study. Evaluation included 23 patients with and 15 patients without implant-borne restoration. The quality of life was assessed using the standard QLQ C-30 questionnaire and the H&N35 module of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). RESULTS: Of implants, 94.7 % were stable at the time of investigation and could be used for prosthesis. Patients with dental implants reported improvement of life quality along with better scores in most function and symptom scales; however, only values for global health status (QL2), absence of dyspnea (DY) and absence of feeding tube (HNFE) were significantly better than in the control group. CONCLUSION: Dental implant insertion in fibula grafts along with implant-borne restoration is a proven concept and might lead to improved quality of life following ablative surgery of the jaw. The effect on the quality of life is not as predictable as on the implant stability. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients with bony defects of the jaw require bony reconstruction. This allows further masticatory rehabilitation using dental implants and might lead to improved quality of life.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dental implants; Free fibular flap; Mandibular reconstruction; Quality of life
Authors: K Bjordal; A de Graeff; P M Fayers; E Hammerlid; C van Pottelsberghe; D Curran; M Ahlner-Elmqvist; E J Maher; J W Meyza; A Brédart; A L Söderholm; J J Arraras; J S Feine; H Abendstein; R P Morton; T Pignon; P Huguenin; A Bottomly; S Kaasa Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: K Bjordal; E Hammerlid; M Ahlner-Elmqvist; A de Graeff; M Boysen; J F Evensen; A Biörklund; J R de Leeuw; P M Fayers; M Jannert; T Westin; S Kaasa Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Hölzle; M R Kesting; G Hölzle; A Watola; D J Loeffelbein; J Ervens; K-D Wolff Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2007-07-05 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Johannes N Lodders; Gustaaf J C van Baar; Marije R Vergeer; Femke Jansen; Engelbert A J M Schulten; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Tymour Forouzanfar; Frank K J Leusink Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 3.359