PURPOSE: To evaluate effects of preoperative virtual planning and jaw reconstruction guided by dental implant rehabilitation on dental prosthesis rehabilitation after jaw reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients indicated for segmental jaw resection and who agreed to receive jaw reconstruction procedures were enrolled in the study. Appropriate surgical procedures were determined by a maxillofacial surgeon and a prosthodontist before surgery. The virtual design was created according to preoperative computed tomography. Patients were divided into navigation and non-navigation groups. Implant surgery was performed 6 months after reconstruction surgery. After treatment completion, factors such as survival rate of implants, site of reconstruction, type of graft, and type of prosthesis were compared. RESULTS: In total, 29 patients were included in the study, with 16 patients in the non-navigation group and 13 in the navigation group. A total of 101 implants were inserted, and the implant success rate was 98.02% (2 implants extracted due to peri-implantitis). All patients received prosthetic treatment. Of the 13 navigation group patients, 9 received fixed implant-supported prostheses, whereas the other 4 received removable dentures. Of the 16 non-navigation group patients, 9 eventually received fixed implant-supported prostheses and 7 received removable dentures. There were no significant intergroup differences in terms of prosthesis type (P = .702). However, the proportion of fixed implant-supported prostheses in the navigation group was higher compared with the non-navigation group. CONCLUSION: Preoperative virtual planning and dental implant rehabilitation-guided jaw reconstruction through preoperative designing can provide a good opportunity to achieve high rates of implant success and dental rehabilitation. This method can also benefit fixed implant-supported prosthetic restorations. Moreover, the use of navigation after virtual planning has no effect on the type of prosthetic reconstruction.
PURPOSE: To evaluate effects of preoperative virtual planning and jaw reconstruction guided by dental implant rehabilitation on dental prosthesis rehabilitation after jaw reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients indicated for segmental jaw resection and who agreed to receive jaw reconstruction procedures were enrolled in the study. Appropriate surgical procedures were determined by a maxillofacial surgeon and a prosthodontist before surgery. The virtual design was created according to preoperative computed tomography. Patients were divided into navigation and non-navigation groups. Implant surgery was performed 6 months after reconstruction surgery. After treatment completion, factors such as survival rate of implants, site of reconstruction, type of graft, and type of prosthesis were compared. RESULTS: In total, 29 patients were included in the study, with 16 patients in the non-navigation group and 13 in the navigation group. A total of 101 implants were inserted, and the implant success rate was 98.02% (2 implants extracted due to peri-implantitis). All patients received prosthetic treatment. Of the 13 navigation group patients, 9 received fixed implant-supported prostheses, whereas the other 4 received removable dentures. Of the 16 non-navigation group patients, 9 eventually received fixed implant-supported prostheses and 7 received removable dentures. There were no significant intergroup differences in terms of prosthesis type (P = .702). However, the proportion of fixed implant-supported prostheses in the navigation group was higher compared with the non-navigation group. CONCLUSION: Preoperative virtual planning and dental implant rehabilitation-guided jaw reconstruction through preoperative designing can provide a good opportunity to achieve high rates of implant success and dental rehabilitation. This method can also benefit fixed implant-supported prosthetic restorations. Moreover, the use of navigation after virtual planning has no effect on the type of prosthetic reconstruction.