Page 69 - Craniomaxillofacial Implant Surgery - Jeroen P.J. Dings

Extra-oral implants – insertion per- or post-ablation?
the protocol was controlled; 20 sessions before implant placement and 10 sessions, thereafter.
As the literature describes different survival rates with respect to implant location, patients were divided into two groups (orbital and nasal). This study comprised 18 orbital defects (59 implants) and 17 nasal defects (44 implants) among 19 men and 16 women with a mean age of 65.5 years (range 22–83 years) and 69.3 years (range 18–90 years), respectively (Table 2). Primary diseases are depicted in Table 2. The mean follow-up for orbital and nasal implants was 44 months (range 8–156 months) and 23 months (range 8–82 months), respectively.
Table 2: Overview of type of extraoral prostheses, time of placement, data on patients and no. of implants 4
Type of Time of No. of Mean age in Gender prostheses placement patients years ratio
Primary No. of Implant Success disease implants Failure rate (no. of
(male/
female) patients)
Orbital
Nasal
During 9 ablation
After 9 ablation
During 11 ablation
After 6 ablation
73.4 4/5 (range 60-87)
54.7 4/5 (range 18-82)
71.4 7/4 (range 52-90)
66.7 4/2 (range 59-75)
66.8 19/16
- Basal cell carcinoma (2)
- Squamous cell carcinoma (5)
- Melanoma (5) - Osteosarcoma (1)
- Other* (5)
- Basal cell carcinoma (4)
- Squamous cell carcinoma (11) - Melanoma (2)
30 3 29 5
31 2 13 5
103 15
90.0% 82.8%
93.5% 61.5%
85.4%
Total 35
* Adenocystic carcinoma (2), adenosquamous carcinoma, retinablastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma
Statistical analysis
Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier product limit method. Between groups, the Kaplan–Meier curves were compared using the log-rank test. A p-value below 0.05 is considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using SAS 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
67