Orofacial and Mandibular Reconstruction with the Iliac Crest Free Flap

Jewer, David D; Boyd, J. Brian; Manktelow, Ralph T.; Rosen, Irving B.; Gullane, P. J.; Rotstein, Lome E.; Freeman, John F.; Swartz, William M.

doi:10.1097/00006534-198909000-00002

Cited by 74 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The size of the defect following mandibulectomy was measured using a tape. The amount of graft to be harvested was based on these values and type of the defect (as per HCL classification) [12]. For a ramus, angle defect (H & L) a graft more than 2 cm of the actual defect was sufficient (cases 2 & 4) except in case 7 where a hemimandibulectomy was done.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Non-vascular Fibula Graft for Mandibular Reconstruction

Devireddy

Murugan

Kumar

et al. 2014

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Non-vascular Fibula Graft for Mandibular Reconstruction

Devireddy

Murugan

Kumar

et al. 2014

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Pre-operatively the extent of defect was determined using panaromic radiograph and/or computed tomography (CT). Jewer et al's [11] HCL classification ( Fig. 1) for mandible and Brown's [16] classification (Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Versatility of Fibula Free Flap in Reconstruction of Facial Defects: A Center Study

Shroff

Nair

Shah

et al. 2016

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To study a series of cases where vascularised fibula flap was used in various combinations of bone with muscle and skin along with its modifications for reconstruction of simple and composite defects of the facial region. Patients and MethodsThe investigators designed a retrospective study composed of patients with any pathology or defect who underwent reconstruction of maxilla or mandible with vascularised fibula free flap from 2009 to 2013. All patients were evaluated for age, gender, location and type of defect, incorporation of adjoining skin paddle and muscle, number of fibula osteotomies, ischaemia time, anticoagulant regimen, length of hospital stay, flap failure rate, dental implant rehabilitation. All patients with a minimum follow-up of 3 months post-operatively, were included in this study. Results The study sample composed of 30 patients with average age of 39.5 years. Immediate reconstruction was done in 86.66 % of patients. 93.1 % were mandibular reconstructions. In 40 % of patients, the fibula was double barrelled. Skin island was included with the fibula in 20 % of patients. 10 % patients underwent dental rehabilitation using implants with 6.66 % requiring distraction osteogenesis of the fibula which was not required with double barrel reconstructions. Hematoma at the recipient site was the commonest post-operative complication, although its frequency was low. A significant donor site morbidity of around 3.33 % was seen. Average stay in hospital was about 7 days. Post-operatively all patients ambulated normally and none used assisted devices. A reconstruction plate was used to achieve the ideal contour of the jaw in most cases. Aesthetic results were usually good, especially in young patients. The overall success rate was 93.33 %. Conclusion The fibula has many assets which make it the ideal choice for bony reconstruction of facial skeleton and adjoining soft tissue with predictable results.

show abstract

“…23 Classification of mandibular defects defined as; central defects including both canines are abbreviated as ''C,'' lateral defects that do not include the condyle are abbreviated as ''L'', and the defects include the condyle which is resected together with the lateral mandible abbreviated as ''H''. 23,24 The classification was modified to include ''t'' representing a significant tongue defect, ''m'' a mucosal defect, and ''s'' an external skin defect. 23,25 According to this classification, the case presented in this article was classified as L-t defect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rehabilitation of Partial Mandibulectomy Using Implant-Supported Removable Prosthesis in an Irradiated Patient: Case Report

Arslan¹,

Yazicioğlu²,

Güngör³

2015

Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci Cases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

50umor resections of the tongue, mandible, and adjacent tissues cause problems in prosthetic treatment. Resection of the large parts of these tissues may result in several problems such as speech and articulation problems, difficulty in chewing and swallowing, retrusion and deviation of the mandible, difficulty in controlling lips and jaws in excursions, compromised control of salivary secretions or xerostomia, facial asymmetry, sensory loss, and severe cosmetic disfigurement. Implant retained prosthesis is the best treatment option for these patients. Furthermore, this treatment improves the quality of life. However, mandibular resection patients usually undergo radiotherapy, so implants may fail, and treatment plan can be changed. The purpose of this clinical report is to present a patient with a partially resected mandible treated with implant supported prosthesis. A 51 year-old man with partially resected mandible was referred to prosthetic department for the treatment. The patient was treated with implant supported removable prosthesis with presicion attachments as locator and bar retained attachments. For improving the retantion; an extracoronal attachment was placed to remaining canine. And the maxilla was rehabilitated with fixed partial dentures and presicion attachment prosthesis. Finally, the patient was satisfied with the final result of the function and esthetic appearance of the prostheses.K Ke ey y W Wo or rd ds s: : Radiotherapy; mouth neoplasms; dental prosthesis, implant-supported Ö ÖZ ZE ET T Protetik tedavisi yapılmamış mandibular rezeksiyonlu hastalar; estetik açıdan yüz deformitesi, dengeli olmayan bir oklüzyon ve sosyal fonksiyonlarındaki eksiklikten yakınmaktadır. İmplant destekli protez yapımı bu hastaların fonksiyonel ve estetik açıdan tedavisi için etkili bir seçenektir. Ayrıca, bu tip protezler yaşam kalitesinin yükselmesini sağlamaktadır. Bununla birlikte bu hastalar çoğu zaman radyoterapi almak zorunda kalırlar ve implant kaybı nedeniyle protetik planlamanın değişmesi gerekebilir. Bu vaka raporunun amacı, mandibulası kısmi olarak rezeke edilmiş ve radyoterapi almış bir hastaya ait implant destekli protez yapımının sunulmasıdır. 51 yaşındaki erkek hasta protetik tedavi için protez bölümüne başvurdu. Hastaya kron dışı hassas tutucu, lokator ve bar tutuculu hareketli bir implant destekli protez yapılmasına karar verildi. Üst çenenin tedavisinde; sabit parsiyel protez ve hassas tutuculu hareketli protez kullanıldı. Hasta daimi protezin fonksiyonu ve estetik görünümü açısından memnun olarak kliniğimizden ayrıldı.A An na ah ht ta ar r K Ke el li im me el le er r: : Radyoterapi; ağız tümörleri; diş protezi, implant destekli T Tu ur rk ki iy ye e K Kl li in ni ik kl le er ri i J J D De en nt ta al l S Sc ci i C Ca as se es s 2 20 01 15 5; ;1 1( (1 1) ): :5 50 0--5 5

show abstract

Orofacial and Mandibular Reconstruction with the Iliac Crest Free Flap

Cited by 74 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluation of Non-vascular Fibula Graft for Mandibular Reconstruction

Evaluation of Non-vascular Fibula Graft for Mandibular Reconstruction

Versatility of Fibula Free Flap in Reconstruction of Facial Defects: A Center Study

Rehabilitation of Partial Mandibulectomy Using Implant-Supported Removable Prosthesis in an Irradiated Patient: Case Report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About