Overdentures on primary mandibular implants in patients with oral cancer: a follow-up study over 14 years
Introduction
Resection of a tumour in the oral cavity can have a profound effect on oral functions such as chewing, swallowing, and intelligible speech.1 Postoperative radiotherapy usually further compromises oral functioning. Changes in oral anatomy as a result of resection, and complications of radiotherapy such as xerostomia and intolerance of the denture-bearing mucosa to mechanical loading, limit prosthetic rehabilitation in these patients.2 Prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous patients after treatment of oral cancer is difficult and therefore often omitted. However, adequate prosthetic rehabilitation is a pivotal factor for patients to regain oral function.3
In healthy patients oral function can be improved using implant-retained mandibular overdentures,4, 5 and this treatment has become important in the rehabilitation of oral cancer patients as well.6 Implants may be best inserted at the time of the resection (primary insertion of implants),7, 8, 9, 10, 11 as many patients postpone or simply decline implant-based treatment if it is offered after resection of the tumour and postoperative radiotherapy.12, 13, 14
Primary insertion appreciably reduces time between resection and prosthetic rehabilitation. This may allow patients to regain better oral function sooner after completion of the oncological treatment. Another advantage is the presumed higher survival rate of the implants when they are inserted before instead of after radiotherapy, as initial osseointegration will have taken place before the implants and mandibular bone are exposed to ionising radiation. Systematic reviews have shown that most publications about dental implants in patients with oral cancer referred to implants inserted after resection, or radiotherapy, or both, had been completed.15, 16 Only a limited number of studies reported primary implants. We presume that the benefits of primary insertion outweigh the risk that the implants will not be used for prosthetic rehabilitation. However, further study is needed to estimate which patients with oral cancer can benefit from primary implants. Does it depend on the primary site of the tumour, its size, whether the patient is treated by radiotherapy, or the type of reconstruction?
In this study we have assessed the outcomes of treatment (which patients benefit, their quality of life, their oral functioning and satisfaction, the condition of the peri-implant tissues, and survival of the implant) in a prospective cohort of 164 patients with oral cancer who were given primary mandibular implants to support an implant-retained mandibular overdenture up to 14 years after insertion of the implants.
Section snippets
Inclusion criteria and treatment
All consecutive edentulous patients with oral cancer referred to the Head and Neck Oncology group of the University Medical Centre Groningen between May 1998 and November 2010 were screened to be included in this study. Inclusion criteria were: edentulous upper and lower jaw; history of prosthetic problems related to lack of stability and retention of the lower denture, or expected problems with the lower denture after oncological treatment; malignancy in the lower oral cavity or oropharynx
Patients and implants
One hundred and eighty patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Fifteen patients did not have implants inserted because of anatomical limitations in the mandible that appeared or were created during resection (such as lack of enough bone in which to insert the implant). One patient had chosen conventional treatment instead of insertion of an implant, so a total of 16 patients were excluded from analyses. Selection of patients is shown in Figure 1, and details of patients in Table 1.
Loss of
Discussion
Many edentulous patients with oral cancer may benefit from insertion of endosseous dental implants during resection of the tumour at an early stage. Completion of prosthetic rehabilitation and oral functioning, chewing ability, and patients’ satisfaction were independent of site or stage of tumour, type of reconstruction, and the number of implants inserted. Patients wearing an implant-retained mandibular overdenture were able to chew significantly better, were less awkward socially, and had
Conflict of Interest
None declared
Ethics statement/confirmation that permission of patients was given
None required
References (24)
- et al.
Immediate mandibular reconstruction and placement of dental implants. at the time of ablative surgery
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol
(1994) - et al.
Prosthodontic rehabilitation of oral function in head-neck cancer patients with dental implants placed simultaneously during ablative tumour surgery: an assessment of treatment outcomes and quality of life
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2008) - et al.
Rehabilitation of oral function in head and neck cancer patients after radiotherapy with implant-retained dentures: Effects of hyperbaric oxygen therapy
Oral Oncol
(2007) - et al.
Interforaminal implant placement in oral cancer patients: During ablative surgery or delayed? A 5-year retrospective study
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2013) - et al.
Systematic review of primary osseointegrated dental implants in head and neck oncology
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg
(2011) - et al.
Implant survival rate after oral cancer therapy: a review
Oral Oncol
(2010) - et al.
Dosimetric evaluation of the effect of dental implants in head and neck radiotherapy
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod
(2005) - et al.
Mastication in patients treated for malignancies in tongue and/or floor of mouth: a 1-year prospective study
Head Neck
(2011) - et al.
Prevention and treatment of the consequences of head and neck radiotherapy
Crit Rev Oral Biol Med
(2003) - et al.
Oral symptoms and functional outcome related to oral and oropharyngeal cancer
Support Care Cancer
(2011)
Mandibular implant-supported overdentures and oral function
Clin Oral Implants Res
Masticatory function in patients with an extremely resorbed mandible restored with mandibular implant-retained overdentures: Comparison of three types of treatment protocols
J Oral Rehabil
Cited by (31)
Radiotherapy and the survival of dental implants: a systematic review
2022, British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryImmediate implant placement in edentulous oral cancer patients: a long-term retrospective analysis of 207 patients
2021, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryCitation Excerpt :Most patients received functioning dentures within 1 year of surgery, and radiotherapy was one of the main delaying factors (233 versus 420 days after surgery). This is in accordance with another study on immediate implant placement11. Studies on postponed implant placement show a markedly slower prosthodontic rehabilitation, ranging from 24 to 60 months after surgery5,14,25.
Medically Complex Dental Implant Patients: Controversies About Systemic Disease and Dental Implant Success/Survival
2021, Dental Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :All investigators recommend that decisions should be based on the individual patient, the duration of steroid therapy, and the type of autoimmune disease present when deciding whether implants are a viable option. Autoimmune disease can also predispose patients to gastroesophageal issues and this patient population is often prescribed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).1,40,41 Adverse effects of PPI therapy include gastrointestinal symptoms, osteoporotic fractures, infection, and thrombocytopenia.
Maxillofacial Reconstruction Using Vascularized Fibula Free Flaps and Endosseous Implants
2019, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North AmericaCitation Excerpt :Metallic objects in the radiation field do alter adjacent-tissue radiation doses.69 Primary placement of implants before radiation therapy can cause backscattering, dose escalation in the bone in front of the implant, and shielding behind the implant.70,71 Larger implant sizes lead to increased local x-ray or gamma-ray backscatter and would lead to higher local doses of radiation and increased likelihood of ORN.
Implant supported dental rehabilitation following segmental mandibular reconstruction- quality of life outcomes of a prospective randomized trial
2016, Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial SurgeryCitation Excerpt :However, there is only limited evidence for the benefit of implant-supported overdentures in patients with reconstructed mandibles (Shaw et al., 2005; Tang et al., 2008). It has been suggested that implant-supported overdentures in reconstructed jaws can be stabilized with as few as two implants (Raoul et al., 2009; Korfage et al., 2014). However, some studies suggest the need for four implants to achieve maximal implant support for the prosthesis and to relieve the vulnerable underlying soft tissues (Weischer et al., 1996; Schoen et al., 2008).