Page 68 - Craniomaxillofacial Implant Surgery - Jeroen P.J. Dings

Chapter 4
Materials and methods
A retrospective study was conducted on 35 consecutive patients with osseointegrated implant-retained maxillofacial prostheses due to an oncologic disease. All patients were treated at the Departments of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Special Dental Care of the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center (RUMC) and University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU), the Netherlands between 1997 and 2010. Patient records were assessed for demographic data, tumor type and location and treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy).
Medical and dental charts were reviewed to collect data on the number of implants placed, time of ablative surgery, radiation status, time and site of implant placement, and time of irradiation (Table 1).
Table 1: Craniofacial implant data regarding time of placement, radiation therapy and types of implants
Inserted before irradiation
Inserted after irradiation
No. Implants
RTX (SD)
Time interval (months) No. of implants lost Follow-up (months) Succes rate
Types of implants
No. Implants
RTX (SD)
Time interval (months) No. of implants lost Follow-up (months) Succes rate
Types of implants
DA-implants (during ablation)
43
60 (6.4)
2 (range 1-3 months)
4
33 (range 11-156 months) 90.7%
Astra (10) Branemark (29) Xive(4)
18
57 (7.3)
27 (range 20-36 months) 1
30 (range 10-84 months) 94.4%
Astra (3) Branemark (9) Xive (3) Unknown (3)
AA-implants (after ablation)
- - - - - - -
42
58 (4.7)
98 (12-300 months) 10
39 (8-104 months) 76.2%
Astra (8) Branemark (13) Xive(14)
IMZ (7)
66
Survival rates were based on osseointegration of the implant. If
implant needed to be removed or buried due to misplacement, it
successful. The length of the observation period corresponded to the last relevant medical chart note or death of a patient. If HBO therapy was given, the consistency of
an osseointegrated was still considered