Effect of postoperative radiotherapy on the functional result of implants placed during ablative surgery for oral cancer

Five‐year follow‐up of oral functioning and quality of life in patients with oral cancer with implant‐retained mandibular overdentures

“…Reported percentage are between 22% and 91%, 9,14,[45][46][47][48][49][50] depending largely on the type of patients included, the type of reconstruction, the survival rate of patients and implants, and the length of the follow-up. In our study where the implants were placed during ablative surgery, a relatively large number of the living patients were rehabilitated with dentures (at T 2 , 92%; at T 3 , 83%).…”

Perioperative assessment of psychological state and quality of life of head and neck cancer patients undergoing surgery

“…Difficulties with eating, swallowing and speaking caused by surgery directly impact patients' daily life. The mandible and teeth are vital for chewing, and these structures are affected by treatments for head and neck cancer that involve jaw resection or teeth extractions, resulting in the patient becoming edentulous and/or finding it difficult to chew 19 . The present study confirmed that surgery for head and neck cancer can reduce QOL in the somatic and specific domains.…”

Dental Implants Installed in Irradiated Jaws

“…The findings regarding the domains of the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale were as follows: 1: none of the studies reported sample size calculations; 2 and 3: in all of the studies, the representativeness of the irradiated and nonirradiated (when described) patients was considered to be adequately addressed; 4: assessment of peri-implant conditions was considered adequate in 8 studies (Albrektsson et al, 1988;Andersson et al, 1998;Brogniez et al, 1998;Esser et al, 1999;Granstrom et al, 1999;Goto et al, 2002;Visch et al, 2002;Landes and Kovacs, 2006) and unclear for the remaining articles; 5: only Albrektsson et al (1988) and Granstrom et al (1999) did not describe whether radiotherapy was performed before or after implant placement; 6: none of the studies reported training or calibration of the examiners of clinical outcome; 7: 2 studies had a prospective design (Visch et al, 2002;Landes and Kovacs, 2006); 8: 2 studies reported that all patients received similar implant therapy (Esser et al, 1999;Schepers et al, 2006); 9: 1 publication described statistical assessment performed with control for confounders (Visch et al, 2002); 10: none of the authors described whether independent blind assessment of peri-implant conditions was used; An approximate number of implants was calculated based on the survival rate (%), as well only data from implants placed in residual bone were extracted from the study. Goto et al 11: all of the studies described the radiation doses used for oncologic treatment, except for Albrektsson et al (1988); 12: in 2 publications, > 70% of the treated patients were followed during the entire study period (Landes and Kovacs, 2006;Katsoulis et al, 2013); 13: Esser et al (1999), Granstrom et al (1999), Schepers et al (2006), Werkmeister et al (1999), Goto et al (2002) and Visch et al (2002) compared their outcomes using statistical analyses; and 14: all authors defined the number of patients and/or implants per group as the unit of analysis.…”