Search

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the differences in the accuracy of immediate intraoral, immediate extraoral, and delayed dental implant placement with surgical guides (static computer-aided implant surgery) in patients treated with mandibular reconstruction., Methods: This was a retrospective study. The patients were divided into three groups: immediate intraoral placement (IIO), immediate extraoral placement (IEO), and delayed placement (DEL). Four variables were used to compare the planned and actual implant positions: angular deviation, three-dimensional (3D) deviation at the entry point of the implant, 3D deviation at the apical point of the implant, and depth deviation., Results: The angular deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. The 3D deviation at the entry point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The 3D deviation at the apical point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .01) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The depth deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. There was no statistical difference between the IEO and DEL group in angular and 3D deviation., Conclusion: With surgical guides, among the different approaches for implant placement, delayed implant placement remains the most accurate approach for patients treated with mandibular reconstruction., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: One-stage jaw reconstruction with fibular flap and prosthetic rehabilitation restores bony and dental continuity simultaneously. It was also called as "jaw-in-a-day (JIAD)" technique. However, bone volume and height of fibular flap may be insufficient for dental implant insertion. The provision of a considerable amount of bone makes an iliac flap the ideal choice in these cases. We present the first case report to document the use of one-stage jaw reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation with the iliac flap. Case presentation: We modified the conventional JIAD workflow to make it suitable for iliac flap. Two cases were presented who both underwent segmental mandibulectomy for ameloblastoma. Virtual surgical planning was performed in all cases. The iliac crest was positioned upward to provide cortical bone for achieving primary stability of dental implants. Similar to the "all-on-4" procedure, the iliac bone was placed 12 to 15 mm below the occlusal plane to create adequate space for the implant-retained prosthesis. Immediate implant-based dental rehabilitation was performed at same stage. The surgery was successful in all cases without any short-term complications. In the first postoperative week, patients were given a liquid diet through a nasal feeding tube. The liquid diet is advised until 1 month after the surgery. Thereafter, a soft diet is recommended. Patients were advised to resume routine mastication and normal diet 3 months after the surgery. Peri-implantitis occurred in one patient, and additional gingival graft was required. Postoperative function and esthetics were satisfactory at the last follow-up visit. Conclusions: One-stage jaw reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation with the iliac flap are safe and useful for restoring postoperative function and esthetics. It should be used in more cases with a longer follow-up in further studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Midface reconstruction is challenging for functional and esthetic reasons. The present study analyzed the effect of virtual surgical planning (VSP) of the deep circumflex iliac artery (DCIA) flap for midface reconstruction. Patients and Methods: Thirty-four patients who underwent midface reconstruction with the DCIA flap were included in this retrospective study. Of the 34 patients, 16 underwent preoperative VSP, which used a three-dimensionally printed surgical guide, computer-assisted navigation system, and pre-bent titanium implants to transfer VSP into real-world surgery. The other 18 patients underwent traditional midface reconstruction. The following were compared between the two groups: bony contact rate in the buttress region (BCR), dental arch reconstruction rate (DAR), surgical approach, position of vascular anastomosis, and dental implantation rate. The independent-samples t -test and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In total, 12 males and 22 females were included in this study. All patients underwent midface reconstruction using the DCIA flap at the same institution. The median age of patients was 33 years (range: 16–68 years). The average BCR and DAR values in the VSP group were 59.4% ± 27.9% and 87.5% ± 18.9%, respectively, which were significantly higher compared with the non-VSP group (P = 0.049 and P = 0.004, respectively). The dental implantation rate in the VSP group (50.0%) was significantly higher compared with the non-VSP group (11.1%; P = 0.023). The intraoral approach for tumor ablation and vascular anastomosis was the most frequent choice in both groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups. All patients were satisfied with facial symmetry postoperatively. Conclusions: VSP could effectively augment the effect of midface reconstruction with the DCIA flap. Stronger bone contact in the buttress region and higher DAR provide more opportunity for dental implantation, which might be the best solution to improve masticatory function in patients with midface defects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Iliac flap is more suitable for repairing Brown class b and c defects of maxilla. • Fibular free flap is longer and better for Brown class d defect reconstruction. • Iliac flap is thicker, wider and can provide sufficient bone for implantation. • Reconstruction method should be based on the defect type and implantation demands. The deep circumflex iliac artery flap (DCIA) and vascularized fibular free flap (FFF) are mainstay flaps for maxillary defect reconstruction. This study compared the functional outcomes and success rates of these flaps to provide midface reconstruction strategies. Maxillary defects reconstructed with DCIA or FFF at the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology between May 2016 and May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The length, width, and height of the grafted bone segments; intermaxillary distance; buttress reconstruction rate (BRR); dental arch reconstruction rate (DAR); success rate; and dental implantation rate were compared. The DCIA and FFF groups had 33 and 27 patients, respectively. Success rate in the DCIA group was 93.94 % and 100 % in the FFF group. The DCIA length was less than that of FFF; however, the width and height were significantly larger. 87.10 % of cases in the DCIA group were classified as Brown class b and c, 51.85 % of cases in the FFF group were classified as Brown class d. The average BRR in the DCIA group was 69.89 % ± 16.05 %, which was significantly higher than that in the FFF group. A total of 38.7 % and 11.1 % patients in the DCIA and FFF groups, respectively, had completed implantation. DCIA has a greater width and height, and is more suitable for repairing Brown class b and c defects, providing sufficient bone for implantation, while the FFF is longer and more suitable for Brown class d defect reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]