Search

Purpose: To assess the implant survival rate in mandibles reconstructed with free fibula flap after oral tumor resection after 1 year of prosthetic loading. A secondary objective was to compare immediate or delayed implant placement protocols in this population., Materials and Methods: Electronic and manual searches were performed on different databases for controlled and prospective trials that indicated implant survival rate. This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines. Risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane Collaboration tools. Meta-analyses heterogeneity source assessment and GRADE evaluation were performed among studies with identical follow-ups., Results: Among 305 primarily selected articles, 109 were eligible after reading the title and abstract, and 8 were included after full-text reading: 2 randomized controlled trials and 6 prospective studies comprising 140 patients and 507 implants. Meta-analyses estimated an overall survival rate of 97% (95% CI: 94% to 99%) after 1 year of prosthetic loading. The survival rate was 98% (95% CI: 94% to 100%) with immediate implantation and 97% (95% CI: 90% to 99%) with delayed implantation. Only 3 studies reported radiotherapy treatment, with no real impact on implant survival rate. Overall, 69% of tumors were benign., Conclusions: Implant placement in vascularized fibula flaps in the mandible is recommended for patients undergoing segmental mandibular reconstruction after tumor resection. Within the limitations of this study, no significant difference in survival rates was found between immediate and delayed implant placement.

Oral rehabilitation of adult patients with cleft lip and palate is related to the severity of the anatomical and functional alterations that hamper the proper closure of the nasopharynx. The ideal treatment is closure by bone graft and orthodontics. However, when surgery is not possible or when the patient does not wish to undergo surgery, a palatal prosthesis may offer the best solution in most clinical situations. The authors of this article propose a new classification to help the practitioner with decision making and prosthetic treatment planning for residual palatoalveolar cleft defects.