1
|
Dugast S, Longis J, Anquetil M, Corre P, Komarova S, Bertin H. Assessing Dental Implant Success: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Primary Versus Secondary Implantation in Free Bone Flap Reconstruction for Malignant Tumors. Head Neck 2025; 47:1277-1290. [PMID: 39737519 DOI: 10.1002/hed.28059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2024] [Revised: 12/21/2024] [Accepted: 12/23/2024] [Indexed: 01/01/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dental implantation of bone reconstructions in oncologic situations improves patients' orofacial function and quality of life. There are currently no recommendations on the timing of implantation. METHODS This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare primary and secondary dental implantation of free bone flaps in reconstructions for malignant tumors of the oral cavity. The primary objective was to evaluate the implant survival rate, with secondary criteria including time to prosthesis placement, postoperative complications, and data on quality of life. Results-Three databases were screened for articles published between January 1990 and April 2024. Out of 2438 studies, 16 met the eligibility criteria, encompassing 284 patients. In total, 319 implants were placed in the primary implantation group and 1108 in the second group. Implant survival rate was 92.5% in the primary implantation group compared to 88.5% in the secondary implantation group. This systematic review underscores a higher success rate for implants placed primarily in patients with oral cancer. CONCLUSIONS Given the rapid functional and aesthetic improvement offered by prosthetic rehabilitation, primary implantation should be systematically considered in the oncological population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Dugast
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Julie Longis
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Marine Anquetil
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
| | - Pierre Corre
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
- Nantes Université, Oniris, Univ Angers, CHU Nantes, INSERM, Regenerative Medicine and Skeleton, RMeS, UMR 1229, Nantes, France
| | - Svetlana Komarova
- Shriners Hospital for Children, Montreal, Canada
- Dental Medicine and Oral Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Hélios Bertin
- Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology, Nantes Université, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
- Nantes Université, Univ Angers, CHU Nantes, INSERM, CNRS, CRCI2NA, Nantes, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Survival rates of dental implants in patients with head and neck pathologies: 12-year single-operator study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2022; 134:28-35. [PMID: 35165065 DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2021.12.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2021] [Revised: 11/21/2021] [Accepted: 12/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the survival rates of dental implants placed in patients with head and neck pathologies treated with resective surgery with or without free flap reconstruction, radiotherapy alone, and/or chemotherapy. STUDY DESIGN In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the survival of intraoral dental implants placed by the same surgeon over a 12-year period from 2007 to 2019. These implants were followed up clinically and radiographically for a period of 36 months postoperatively and throughout the restorative phase. RESULTS A total of 190 patients with a total of 739 dental implants, comprising both intraoral and zygomatic implants, were included in this study. Overall, the dental implant survival rate was 95%, with a similar rate for dental implants placed in irradiated and nonirradiated bone (90% vs 93%). A lower implant survival rate was noted in implants placed in transplanted bone (79%). In cases of implant failure (n = 17), 35% (n = 6) of protheses survived and remained functional. CONCLUSIONS Our findings support the placement of dental implants in patients with benign and malignant pathologies of the head and neck to improve their quality of life. However, we highlight the need for careful surgical planning and placement by experienced clinicians.
Collapse
|
3
|
Glover S, McGoldrick D, Parmar S, Laverty D. Re: “Outcomes of osseointegrated implants in patients with benign and malignant pathologies of the head and neck: a 10-year single-centre study”. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022; 51:1370-1371. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.04.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
4
|
Ma H, Van Dessel J, Shujaat S, Bila M, Sun Y, Politis C, Jacobs R. Long-term survival of implant-based oral rehabilitation following maxillofacial reconstruction with vascularized bone flap. Int J Implant Dent 2022; 8:15. [PMID: 35378661 PMCID: PMC8980171 DOI: 10.1186/s40729-022-00413-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2022] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim The aim of the study was to assess the 5-year cumulative survival rate of implant-based dental rehabilitation following maxillofacial reconstruction with a vascularized bone flap and to investigate the potential risk factors which might influence the survival rate. Materials and methods A retrospective cohort study was designed. Inclusion criteria involved 18 years old or above patients with the availability of clinical and radiological data and a minimum follow-up 1 year following implant placement. The cumulative survival rate was analyzed by Kaplan–Meier curves and the influential risk factors were assessed using univariate log-rank tests and multivariable Cox-regression analysis. Results 151 implants were assessed in 40 patients with a mean age of 56.43 ± 15.28 years at the time of implantation. The mean number of implants placed per patient was 3.8 ± 1.3 with a follow-up period of 50.0 ± 32.0 months. The cumulative survival at 1-, 2- and 5-years was 96%, 87%, and 81%. Patients with systemic diseases (HR = 3.75, 95% CI 1.65–8.52; p = 0.002), irradiated flap (HR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.00–5.17; p = 0.05) and poor oral hygiene (HR = 11.67; 95% CI 4.56–29.88; p < 0.0001) were at a significantly higher risk of implant failure. Conclusion The cumulative implant survival rate was highest at 1st year followed by 2nd and 5th year, indicating that the risk of implant failure increased over time. Risk indicators that seem to be detrimental to long-term survival include poor oral hygiene, irradiated flap and systemic diseases. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-022-00413-7.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongyang Ma
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Van Dessel
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Sohaib Shujaat
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Michel Bila
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Yi Sun
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Constantinus Politis
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Reinhilde Jacobs
- OMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging & Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Campus Sint-Rafaël, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. .,Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. .,Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|