Influence of implant-specific radiation doses on peri-implant hard and soft tissue: An observational pilot study

Long-Term Survival of Dental Implants in Irradiated Patients

The surgical ablation of head and neck cancer followed by radiotherapy often leads to unfavorable functional and aesthetic outcomes. Studies have demonstrated that these outcomes can significantly impact quality of life. Dental implants play a crucial role in rehabilitation by facilitating the use of suprastructures and obturators. However, the long-term survival of dental implants in patients who have undergone radiotherapy remains uncertain, raising several questions. These include determining the optimal timing for dental implantation (before or after radiotherapy), identifying the radiotherapy threshold for implant loss, and considering the role of hyperbaric oxygen therapy. These and other related concerns will be addressed in the following article.

A critical reflection of radiotherapy on osseous free flaps in mandibular segmental resection and immediate reconstruction in locally advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma: A cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

With standard radiotherapy protocols after R0 resection of advanced local oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and primary reconstruction of segmental defects, a high radiation dose is applied to healthy tissue in autologous microvascular free flaps. Considering the potential consequences of flap complications and associated surgeries for patients, data is lacking on whether postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) of the flap volume is indicated at all.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with segmental mandibular resection and immediate reconstruction with osseous free flaps due to advanced OSCC between 2012 and 2022 were analyzed retrospectively regarding overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local failure-free survival (LFFS), the need for secondary surgeries as well as flap complications and compared between patients with and without PORT in a matched-pair approach with occurrence of flap complications as a primary endpoint.

RESULTS

105 patients matched the inclusion criteria. The maximum follow-up period was 60 months. 68 patients received PORT. 74 patients were included in the final analysis. No case of disease recurrence inside the free flap was recorded. There were no significant differences in DFS (p = 0.21), OS (p = 0.33) and LFFS (p = 0.6) between both cohorts. Occurrence of osteoradionecrosis (p = 0.03) and bone exposure (p = 0.003) was higher in irradiated flaps. In patients with PORT, the demand for secondary surgeries due to flap complications was significantly higher (p = 0.009). Radiation doses were not increased in patients with flap ORN.

CONCLUSION

PORT is associated with higher flap complications and need for secondary surgeries in advanced stage OSCC. Given a recurrence rate of zero inside the flap without PORT and the improbability of recurrence within healthy transplanted tissue, the usefulness of applying high radiation doses to this vulnerable tissue is questioned. Further refinements of RT planning should be evaluated and tested in a RCT trial.

Site-specific radiation dosage and implant survival in oral cancer patients: A cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the radiation dosages (Dmean) on implant regions to identify the threshold for implant loss in patients with an intraoral malignancy treated with dental implants to support a mandibular denture during ablative surgery before volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data was collected prospectively from 28 patients treated surgically for an intraoral malignancy, followed by postoperative radiotherapy (VMAT) and analyzed retrospectively. Patients received 2 implants in the native mandible during ablative surgery. Implant-specific Dmean values were retrieved from the patients' files. Radiographic bone loss was measured 1 year after implant placement and during the last follow-up appointment. Implant survival was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate logistic regression and Cox-regression analyses were performed to investigate the effect of increasing implant-specific radiation dosages on implant loss.

RESULTS

Five out of 56 placed implants were lost during follow-up (median 36.0 months, IQR 39.0). Radiographically, peri-implant bone loss occurred in implants with a Dmean > 40 Gy. Implant loss occurred only in implants with a Dmean > 50 Gy.

CONCLUSION

An implant-specific Dmean higher than 50 Gy is related to more peri-implant bone loss and, eventually, implant loss.

Design and evaluation of a deep learning-based automatic segmentation of maxillary and mandibular substructures using a 3D U-Net

Background

Current segmentation approaches for radiation treatment planning in head and neck cancer patients (HNCP) typically consider the entire mandible as an organ at risk, whereas segmentation of the maxilla remains uncommon. Accurate risk assessment for osteoradionecrosis (ORN) or implant-based dental rehabilitation after radiation therapy may require a nuanced analysis of dose distribution in specific mandibular and maxillary segments. Manual segmentation is time-consuming and inconsistent, and there is no definition of jaw subsections.

Materials and methods

The mandible and maxilla were divided into 12 substructures. The model was developed from 82 computed tomography (CT) scans of HNCP and adopts an encoder-decoder three-dimensional (3D) U-Net structure. The efficiency and accuracy of the automated method were compared against manual segmentation on an additional set of 20 independent CT scans. The evaluation metrics used were the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), 95% Hausdorff distance (HD95), and surface DSC (sDSC).

Results

Automated segmentations were performed in a median of 86 s, compared to manual segmentations, which took a median of 53.5 min. The median DSC per substructure ranged from 0.81 to 0.91, and the median HD95 ranged from 1.61 to 4.22. The number of artifacts did not affect these scores. The maxillary substructures showed lower metrics than the mandibular substructures.

Conclusions

The jaw substructure segmentation demonstrated high accuracy, time efficiency, and promising results in CT scans with and without metal artifacts. This novel model could provide further investigation into dose relationships with ORN or dental implant failure in normal tissue complication prediction models.

Optimal Treatment Order With Fibula-Free Flap Reconstruction, Oncologic Treatment, and Dental Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients benefit from craniofacial reconstruction, but no clear guidance exists for rehabilitation timing. This meta-analysis aims to clarify the impact of oncologic treatment order on implant survival. An algorithm to guide placement sequence is also proposed in this paper. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies on HNC patients with ablative and fibula-free flap (FFF) reconstruction surgeries and radiotherapy (RTX). Primary outcomes included treatment sequence, implant survival rates, and RTX dose. Of 661 studies, 20 studies (617 implants, 199 patients) were included. Pooled survival rates for implants receiving >60 Gy RTX were significantly lower than implants receiving < 60 Gy (82.8% versus 90.1%, P =0.035). Placement >1 year after RTX completion improved implant survival rates (96.8% versus 82.5%, P =0.001). Implants receiving pre-placement RTX had increased survival with RTX postablation versus before (91.2% versus 74.8%, P <0.001). One hundred seventy-seven implants were placed only in FFF with higher survival than implants placed in FFF or native bone (90.4% versus 83.5%, P =0.035). Radiotherapy is detrimental to implant survival rates when administered too soon, in high doses, and before tumor resection. A novel evidence-based clinical decision-making algorithm was presented for utilization when determining the optimal treatment order for HNC patients. The overall survival of dental prostheses is acceptable, reaffirming their role as a key component in rehabilitating HNC patients. Considerations must be made regarding RTX dosage, timing, and implant location to optimize survival rates and patient outcomes for improved functionality, aesthetics, and comfort.

Cross-sectional analysis comparing prefabricated titanium to individualized hybrid zirconia abutments for cemented zirconia based fixed dental prostheses: a critical concept assessment

PURPOSE

Despite the differences in material properties and shapes among the different types of prefabricated titanium (pTiA) and individualized hybrid zirconia abutments (ihZiA), the biological and clinical relevance of materials and construction features remains vague. Yet, individualized ihZiA are increasingly implemented into daily routine aiming to satisfy rising expectations. The objective was to compare these two types of abutments in fixed dental prostheses (FDP).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examined 462 implants in 102 patients comparing pTiA (52 patients) to ihZiA (50 patients) for FDP. These different treatment regimens were evaluated in terms of peri-implant health, radiographic bone loss, and oral-health related quality of life (OH-QoL) with special consideration of abutment type and superstructure design.

RESULTS

ihZiA showed significantly different design features than prefabricated pTiA, but the annual bone loss in both groups did not. Visible titanium in the esthetic zone negatively impacted OHIP 14 scores. The combination of an emergence angle (EA) of < 30° and a concave emergence profile (EP) as well as gingiva thickness (p = 0.002) at the time of the prosthetic restoration significantly improved the annual peri-implant bone loss, independently of the abutment type.

CONCLUSION

ihZiA showed comparable results to pTiA. To optimize the long-term outcome, not just material alone but generating adequate soft tissue thickness, minimizing the EA, and applying a concave EP seem to be the most relevant factors. To improve OH-QoL, particular attention must be paid to the esthetic zone.

Oral Health in Patients with History of Head and Neck Cancer: Complexity and Benefits of a Targeted Oral Healthcare Pathway

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This work consists in a literature review on the current state of knowledge regarding the oral management of patients with a history of head and neck cancer (HNC), corroborated by clinical cases and illustrated by clear infographic summaries. It aims to provide healthcare professionals with a comprehensive overview of the oral health status of HCN patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Head and neck cancers (HNCs) represent the seventh most common type of cancer worldwide, with over 660,000 annual new cases. Despite the significant negative impact of HNCs on oral health, patients often receive no or inappropriate oral care while the significant impact of oral pathologies on cancer prognosis is commonly underestimated. This work (i) describes the oral cavity during and after HNC through the prism of care complexity and (ii) highlights several potential key factors that could worsen long-time patients' prognosis and quality of life. By investigating the biological, microbiological, functional, and psychological dimensions of the interrelationships between HNCs and oral health, the authors explored the barriers and benefits of a targeted oral healthcare pathway. This article emphasizes the importance of multidisciplinary care and highlights the need for further research elucidating the intricate relationships between oral health and HNCs, particularly through the microbiota.

A Mapping Review of the Pathogenesis of Peri-Implantitis: The Biofilm-Mediated Inflammation and Bone Dysregulation (BIND) Hypothesis

This mapping review highlights the need for a new paradigm in the understanding of peri-implantitis pathogenesis. The biofilm-mediated inflammation and bone dysregulation (BIND) hypothesis is proposed, focusing on the relationship between biofilm, inflammation, and bone biology. The close interactions between immune and bone cells are discussed, with multiple stable states likely existing between clinically observable definitions of peri-implant health and peri-implantitis. The framework presented aims to explain the transition from health to disease as a staged and incremental process, where multiple factors contribute to distinct steps towards a tipping point where disease is manifested clinically. These steps might be reached in different ways in different patients and may constitute highly individualised paths. Notably, factors affecting the underlying biology are identified in the pathogenesis of peri-implantitis, highlighting that disruptions to the host-microbe homeostasis at the implant-mucosa interface may not be the sole factor. An improved understanding of disease pathogenesis will allow for intervention on multiple levels and a personalised treatment approach. Further research areas are identified, such as the use of novel biomarkers to detect changes in macrophage polarisation and activation status, and bone turnover.

Vestibuloplasty and its impact on the long-term survival and success of dental implants in irradiated and non-irradiated patients after head and neck tumor therapy: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of vestibuloplasty on the clinical success and survival of dental implants in head and neck tumor patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective single-center study was conducted. All patients received surgical therapy of a tumor in the head or neck and underwent surgical therapy and, if necessary, radiotherapy/radiochemotherapy. Patients with compromised soft tissue conditions received vestibuloplasty using a split thickness skin graft and an implant-retained splint. Implant survival and success and the influence of vestibuloplasty, gender, radiotherapy, and localizations were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 247 dental implants in 49 patients (18 women and 31 men; mean age of 63.6 years) were evaluated. During the observation period, 6 implants were lost. The cumulative survival rate was 99.1% after 1 year and 3 years and 93.1% after 5 years for patients without vestibuloplasty, compared to a survival and success rate of 100% after 5 years in patients with vestibuloplasty. Additionally, patients with vestibuloplasty showed significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption rates after 5 years (mesial: p = 0.003; distal: p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a high cumulative survival and success rate of dental implants after 5 years in head and neck tumor patients, irrespective of irradiation. Patients with vestibuloplasty showed a significantly higher rate of implant survival and significantly lower peri-implant bone resorption after 5 years.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Vestibuloplasty should always be considered and applied if required by the anatomical situations to achieve high implant survival/success rates in head and neck tumor patients.

Dental implants in patients with head and neck cancer-A systematic review and meta-analysis of the influence of radiotherapy on implant survival

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare implant survival in irradiated and non-irradiated bone and to investigate potential risk factors for implant therapy in oral cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An extensive search in the electronic databases of the National Library of Medicine was performed. Systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA statement. The meta-analysis was performed for studies with a mean follow-up of at least three and five years, respectively.

RESULTS

The systematic review resulted in a mean overall implant survival of 87.8% (34%-100%). The meta-analysis revealed a significantly higher rate of implant failure in irradiated bone compared to non-irradiated bone (p < .00001, OR 1.97, CI [1.63, 2.37]). The studies also showed that implants placed into irradiated grafted bone were more likely to fail than those in irradiated native bone (p < .0001, OR 2.26, CI [1.50, 3.40]).

CONCLUSION

Even though overall implant survival was high, radiotherapy proves to be a significant risk factor for implant loss. Augmentation procedures may also increase the risk of an adverse outcome, especially in combination with radiotherapy.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The treatment of patients receiving radiotherapy of any form requires precise individual planning and a close aftercare. Implants should be placed in local bone rather than in bone grafts, if possible.

Influence of radiotherapy on dental implants placed in individuals before diagnosed with head and neck cancer: focus on implant-bed-specific radiation dosage

OBJECTIVES

The influence of radiotherapy on implants placed before diagnosed as head and neck cancer (HNC) is a potentially informative but poorly explored topic. The aims of this study were to investigate the influence of implant-bed-specific radiation dose on dental implants and to evaluate the impact of these implants on radiation dosimetry.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study with 58 irradiated patients that received dental implant restorations before undergoing radiation treatment for HNC. The radiological success rate and the peri-implant bone resorption values were measured radiographically at 1 and 3 years after radiotherapy. Patients with no implants matching tumor site and stage served as a control group (n = 58).

RESULTS

The median implant-bed-specific radiation dose was 40.3 Gy, which was significantly lower than tumor bed 62.4 Gy. An implant-bed-specific radiation dose higher than 40.0 Gy showed a significantly decreased radiologic success rate when compared to lower doses. Finally, evaluation of the radiation treatment plans revealed similar radiation hot spots in the test group of patients with implants and those of the control group.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms that radiotherapy negatively worsens peri-implant bone resorption, especially for implant-bed-specific dose more than 40 Gy, and the presence of implants within the radiation fields does not alter radiation dosimetry. The findings could be clinically informative to both surgeons and radio-oncologists.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The interactions between radiotherapy and implants placed prior to radiotherapy treatment remain a largely unexplored topic. Based on the analysis of 3-dimensional modulated radiation plans, this study demonstrates the impact of implant-bed-specific radiation dose on marginal bone resorption of implants placed pre-radiation and considers the influence of these implants on radiation dosimetry.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CHICTR2100051923: ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/usercenter.aspx ).

Long-term survival of implant-based oral rehabilitation following maxillofacial reconstruction with vascularized bone flap

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.

Pilot investigation on the dose-dependent impact of irradiation on primary human alveolar osteoblasts in vitro

Radiotherapy of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma can lead to long-term complications like osteoradionecrosis, resulting in severe impairment of the jawbone. Current standard procedures require a 6-month wait after irradiation before dental reconstruction can begin. A comprehensive characterization of the irradiation-induced molecular and functional changes in bone cells could allow the development of novel strategies for an earlier successful dental reconstruction in patients treated by radiotherapy. The impact of ionizing radiation on the bone-forming alveolar osteoblasts remains however elusive, as previous studies have relied on animal-based models and fetal or animal-derived cell lines. This study presents the first in vitro data obtained from primary human alveolar osteoblasts. Primary human alveolar osteoblasts were isolated from healthy donors and expanded. After X-ray irradiation with 2, 6 and 10 Gy, cells were cultivated under osteogenic conditions and analyzed regarding their proliferation, mineralization, and expression of marker genes and proteins. Proliferation of osteoblasts decreased in a dose-dependent manner. While cells recovered from irradiation with 2 Gy, application of 6 and 10 Gy doses not only led to a permanent impairment of proliferation, but also resulted in altered cell morphology and a disturbed structure of the extracellular matrix as demonstrated by immunostaining of collagen I and fibronectin. Following irradiation with any of the examined doses, a decrease of marker gene expression levels was observed for most of the investigated genes, revealing interindividual differences. Primary human alveolar osteoblasts presented a considerably changed phenotype after irradiation, depending on the dose administered. Mechanisms for these findings need to be further investigated. This could facilitate improved patient care by re-evaluating current standard procedures and investigating faster and safer reconstruction concepts, thus improving quality of life and social integrity.

Clinical long-term and patient-reported outcomes of dental implants in oral cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The aim of this clinical study was to investigate the clinical long-term and patient-reported outcome of dental implants in patients with oral cancer. In addition, analysis of the influence of radiation therapy, timing of implant insertion, and augmentation procedures on implant survival was performed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study investigated the clinical outcome of 711 dental implants in 164 oral cancer patients, inserted by experienced surgeons of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Germany. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was evaluated.

RESULTS

Cumulative 5-year and 10-year implant survival rates for all included implants were 87.3% and 80.0%. Implants placed straight after ablative surgery (primary implant placement) and implants placed after completing the oncologic treatment (secondary implant placement) showed a comparable implant survival (92.5% vs. 89.5%; p = 0.635). Irradiation therapy had no significant influence on implant survival of secondary placed implants (p = 0.929). However, regarding implant site (native bone vs. augmented bone) and radiation therapy (non-irradiated bone vs. irradiated bone), implants inserted in irradiated bone that received augmentation procedures showed a statistically significant lower implant survival (p < 0.001). Patients reported a distinct improvement in OHRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

Promising long-term survival rates of dental implants in patients after treatment of oral cancer were seen. In addition, patients benefit in form of an improved OHRQoL. However, bone augmentation procedures in irradiated bone may result in an impaired implants' prognosis.

Significance of site-specific radiation dose and technique for success of implant-based prosthetic rehabilitation in irradiated head and neck cancer patients-A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy aggravates implant-based prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of radiation dose at implant and parotid gland site for prosthetic rehabilitation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The retrospective study includes 121 irradiated head and neck cancer patients with 751 inserted implants. Radiation doses on implant bed and parotid gland site were recorded by 3-dimensional modulated radiation plans. Implant success was clinically and radiographically evaluated according to modified Albrektsson criteria and compared to treatment- and patient-specific data.

RESULTS

Implant overall survival after 5 years was 92.4% with an implant success rate of 74.9%. Main reasons for implant failure were marginal bone resorption (20.9%), implant not in situ or unloaded (9.6%) and peri-implantitis (7.5%). A mean radiation dose of 62.6 Gy was applied with a mean parotid dose of 35 Gy. Modulating radiation techniques went along with lower grades of xerostomia (p < 0.001). At implant site mean doses of 57.5, 42.0, and 32.3 Gy were recorded for oral, oropharyngeal, and hypopharyngeal/laryngeal carcinoma, respectively. Implant success inversely correlated to radiation dose at implant site. Strong predictors for implant failure in uni- and multivariate analysis were implant-specific dose >50 Gy (HR 7.9), parotid dose >30 Gy (HR 2.3), bone (HR 14.5) and soft tissue (HR 4.5) transplants, bad oral hygiene (HR 3.8), nonmodulated radiation treatment planning (HR 14.5), and nontelescopic prosthetics (HR 5.2).

CONCLUSION

Radiotherapy impedes implant success in a dose-dependent manner at implant site. Modern radiation techniques effectively reduce xerostomia favoring implant-based prosthetic rehabilitation. Implantation in bone grafts is more critical and telescopic-retained overdentures should be preferred.