Clinical analysis of denture rehabilitation after mandibular fibula free-flap reconstruction

  • Congwei WANG ,
  • Min GAO ,
  • Yao YU ,
  • Wenbo ZHANG ,
  • Xin PENG
Expand
  • Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology & NHC Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Computerized Dentistry, Beijing 100081, China

Received date: 2023-10-08

  Online published: 2024-02-06

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the postoperative denture restoration and denture function in patients with mandibular defect reconstructed with vascularized free fibula flap. Methods: In the study, 154 patients who underwent mandibular segment resection and used vascularized free fibula flap to repair mandibular defects due to inflammation, trauma and tumor from January 2015 to December 2020 were collected. These patients had common inclusion criteria which were stable occlusal relationship before operation, segmental defects of mandibular bone caused by lesions of mandible and adjacent parts (such as floor of mouth, tongue, cheek), free fibula flap used for repair and surviving after operation. Relevant data were reviewed and situation of denture restoration was followed up. A questionnaire related to denture functional evaluation had been proposed for those who had completed the denture rehabilitation. The evaluation index of denture restoration function was assigned by expert authority to obtain the denture function score. SPSS 18.0 software was used for statistical analysis of the basic information of the patients included in the study and the denture restoration of the patients. Results: The rate of postoperative denture restoration in the patients with mandibular defects repaired by free fibula flap was 17.5%, and the rate of postoperative denture restoration in the patients with benign mandibular tumors was 25.0% (18/72), which was significantly greater than that in the patients with malignant tumors 11.0% (9/82, P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in denture function score between the patients with condylar defect and those without condylar defect in denture repair rate and denture function score (P>0.05). The functional score of implant denture was significantly greater than that of removable denture (P < 0.05). According to Brown classification, the denture function score of the patients with the defect invo-lving the anterior mandibular region was significantly greater than that of the patients without the anterior mandibular region involved (P < 0.05). The poor oral conditions, such as less amount of remaining teeth, insufficient retention strength, large mobility of soft tissue in the surgical area, poor oral vestibular groove condition became the main reason of not receiving denture restoration (37.86%). Conclusion: The denture rehabilitation of mandibular defect reconstructed with vascularized free fibula flap is closely rela-ted to pathological properties and oral conditions. The clinical outcome of implant denture has been confirmed effectively and it is a better choice for future denture restoration after mandibular reconstruction.

Cite this article

Congwei WANG , Min GAO , Yao YU , Wenbo ZHANG , Xin PENG . Clinical analysis of denture rehabilitation after mandibular fibula free-flap reconstruction[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2024 , 56(1) : 66 -73 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.01.011

References

1 Wallace CG , Chang YM , Tsai CY , et al. Harnessing the potential of the free fibula osteoseptocutaneous flap in mandible reconstruction[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2010, 125 (1): 305- 314.
2 Iizuka T , H?fliger J , Seto I , et al. Oral rehabilitation after mandibular reconstruction using an osteocutaneous fibula free flap with endosseous implants. Factors affecting the functional outcome in patients with oral cancer[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2005, 16 (1): 69- 79.
3 Parbo N , Murra NT , Andersen K , et al. Outcome of partial mandibular reconstruction with fibula grafts and implant-supported prostheses[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2013, 42 (11): 1403- 1408.
4 Lilly GL , Petrisor D , Wax MK . Mandibular rehabilitation: From the Andy Gump deformity to jaw-in-a-day[J]. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol, 2021, 6 (4): 708- 720.
5 Petrovic I , Ahmed ZU , Huryn JM , et al. Oral rehabilitation for patients with marginal and segmental mandibulectomy: A retrospective review of 111 mandibular resection prostheses[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2019, 122 (1): 82- 87.
6 Brown JS , Barry C , Ho M , et al. A new classification for mandi-bular defects after oncological resection[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2016, 17 (1): e23- e30.
7 Jacobsen HC , Wahnschaff F , Trenkle T , et al. Oral rehabilitation with dental implants and quality of life following mandibular reconstruction with free fibular flap[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2016, 20 (1): 187- 192.
8 Bodard AG , Salino S , Desoutter A , et al. Assessment of functio-nal improvement with implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation after mandibular reconstruction with a microvascular free fibula flap: A study of 25 patients[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2015, 113 (2): 140- 145.
9 Patel SY , Kim DD , Ghali GE . Maxillofacial reconstruction using vascularized fibula free flaps and endosseous implants[J]. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 2019, 31 (2): 259- 284.
10 Li R , Meng Z , Zhang Y , et al. Soft tissue management: A critical part of implant rehabilitation after vascularized free-flap reconstruction[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2021, 79 (3): 560- 574.
11 Smith Nobrega A , Santiago JF Jr , de Faria Almeida DA , et al. Irradiated patients and survival rate of dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2016, 116 (6): 858- 866.
12 Schiegnitz E , Reinicke K , Sagheb K , et al. Dental implants in patients with head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the influence of radiotherapy on implant survival[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2022, 33 (10): 967- 999.
13 Lee ZH , Avraham T , Monaco C , et al. Optimizing functional outcomes in mandibular condyle reconstruction with the free fibula flap using computer-aided design and manufacturing technology[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2018, 76 (5): 1098- 1106.
14 González-García R , Naval-Gías L , Rodríguez-Campo FJ , et al. Vascularized fibular flap for reconstruction of the condyle after mandibular ablation[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2008, 66 (6): 1133- 1137.
15 Powers DB , Breeze J , Erdmann D . Vascularized fibula TMJ reconstruction: A report of five cases featuring computerized patient-specific surgical planning[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open, 2022, 10 (8): e4465.
16 Yu Y , Zhang WB , Liu XJ , et al. Three-dimensional accuracy of virtual planning and surgical navigation for mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flap[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2016, 74 (7): 1503.e1- e10.
17 Smolka K , Kraehenbuehl M , Eggensperger N , et al. Fibula free flap reconstruction of the mandible in cancer patients: Evaluation of a combined surgical and prosthodontic treatment concept[J]. Oral Oncol, 2008, 44 (6): 571- 581.
18 Brauner E , Valentini V , Jamshir S , et al. Retrospective review of 78 rehabilitated head and neck postoncological patients: A new classification method[J]. Minerva Stomatol, 2016, 65 (1): 17- 32.
19 Roumanas ED , Garrett N , Blackwell KE , et al. Masticatory and swallowing threshold performances with conventional and implant-supoprted prostheses after mandibular fibula free-flap reconstruction[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2006, 96 (4): 289- 297.
20 Lodders JN , van Baar GJC , Vergeer MR , et al. Implant-based dental rehabilitation in head and neck cancer patients after maxillofacial reconstruction with a free vascularized fibula flap: The effect on health-related quality of life[J]. Support Care Cancer, 2022, 30 (6): 5411- 5420.
21 Sozzi D , Novelli G , Silva R , et al. Implant rehabilitation in fibula-free flap reconstruction: A retrospective study of cases at 1-18 years following surgery[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2017, 45 (10): 1655- 1661.
22 Pellegrino G , Tarsitano A , Ferri A , et al. Long-term results of osseointegrated implant-based dental rehabilitation in oncology patients reconstructed with a fibula free flap[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, 20 (5): 852- 859.
23 Ali R , Al-Khayatt A , Barclay C . The use of dental implants, cast bars and sleeve overdentures in oral cancer patients[J]. Br Dent J, 2018, 224 (8): 611- 619.
Outlines

/