A matched-analysis on short-term and long-term (up to 5 years of follow-up) urinary incontinence outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with and without anterior and posterior reconstruction: data on 1358 patients.

PURPOSE: We report a comparative monocentric study with a short and long-term follow-up with the aim to assess differences about urinary continence outcomes in patients treated with Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) with two different techniques: with anterior and posterior reconstruction and without any kind of reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2016 to September 2021, at the Department of Urology of the "F. Miulli" Hospital of Acquaviva delle Fonti, in Italy, 850 eligible patients underwent extraperitoneal RARP with anterior and posterior reconstruction and 508 without reconstructions. RESULTS: In patients undergoing RARP with reconstructions 1 month after surgery the urinary continence was preserved in 287/850 patients (33.8%), 3 months after surgery in 688/850 (81%), 6 months in 721/850 (84.8%), 12 months in 734/850 (86.3%), 18 months in 671/754 (89%), 24 months in 696/754 (92.3%), 36 months in 596/662 (90%), 48 months in 394/421 (93.6%), 60 months in 207/212 (97.6%). In patients undergoing RARP without reconstruction 1 month after surgery urinary continence was preserved in 99/508 (19.4%), after 3 months in 276/508 (54.3%), 6 months in 305/508 (60%), 12 months in 329/508 (64.7%), 18 months in 300/456 (65.7%), 24 months in 295/456 (64.7%), 36 months in 268/371 (72.3%), 48 months in 181/224 (81%), 60 months in 93/103 (90.3%). CONCLUSION: In our case study, the RARP with anterior and posterior reconstruction technique is associated with a statistically significant higher rate (up to 48 months of follow-up) and a faster recovery of urinary continence compared to the technique without reconstructions.

Patient Satisfaction and Impact on Oral Health after Maxillary Rehabilitation Using a Personalized Additively Manufactured Subperiosteal Jaw Implant (AMSJI).

Subperiosteal implants (SIs) were first developed by Dahl in 1941 for oral rehabilitation in case of severe jaw atrophy. Over time, this technique was abandoned due to the high success rate of endosseous implants. The emergence of patient-specific implants and modern dentistry allowed a revisitation of this 80-year-old concept resulting in a novel "high-tech" SI implant. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes in forty patients after maxillary rehabilitation with an additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implant (AMSJI®). The oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14) and numerical rating (NRS) scale were used to assess patient satisfaction and evaluate oral health. In total, fifteen men (mean age: 64.62 years, SD ± 6.75 years) and twenty-five women (mean age: 65.24 years, SD ± 6.77 years) were included, with a mean follow-up time of 917 days (SD ± 306.89 days) after AMSJI installation. Patients reported a mean OHIP-14 of 4.20 (SD ± 7.10) and a mean overall satisfaction based on the NRS of 52.25 (SD ± 4.00). Prosthetic rehabilitation was achieved in all patients. AMSJI is a valuable treatment option for patients with extreme jaw atrophy. Patients enjoy treatment benefits resulting in high patient satisfaction rates and impact on oral health.

Soft tissue response and determination of underlying risk drivers for recession and mucositis after AMSJI implantation in the maxilla.

PURPOSE: There are few treatment options for oral rehabilitation in patients with advanced maxillary resorption (Cawood-Howell Class V or more). Patient-specific, 3D-printed titanium subperiosteal implants have been described as a potentially valuable alternative solution. Surgeon and patient mediated functional outcomes have been studied and the results are promising. The surrounding soft tissue health has been much less researched. This study aims to evaluate the soft tissue response to the placement of additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implants (AMSJI®) in the severely atrophic maxilla and to identify possible risk factors for soft tissue breakdown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An international multicenter study was conducted and fifteen men (mean age 64.62 years, SD ± 6.75) and twenty-five women (mean age 65.24 years, SD ± 6.77) with advanced maxillary jaw resorption (Cawood-Howell Class V or more) were included in this study. General patient data were collected and all subjects were clinically examined. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent bilateral AMSJI placement® in the maxilla at least a year before and whose surgeon and themselves agreed to participate in the study before their inclusion. RESULTS: A total of forty patients were enrolled with a mean follow-up period of 917 days (SD ± 306.89 days). Primary stability of the implant was achieved postoperatively in all cases, and all implants were loaded with a final prosthesis. At the time of study, only one patient showed mobility of the bilateral AMSJI (more than 1 mm). Exposure of the framework, due to mucosal recession, was seen in 26 patients (65%) and was mainly in the left (21.43%) and right (18.57%) mid-lateral region. Thin biotype and the presence of mucositis were found to be risk factors (p-value < 0.05). Although not significant, smokers had a nearly seven times (Odds ratio 6.88, p=0.08) more risk of developing a recession compared to nonsmokers. CONCLUSION: Twenty-six (65%) patients presented with a recession in one or (more) of the seven regions after oral rehabilitation with bilateral AMSJI installation. Several risk drivers were evaluated. The collapse of soft tissues around the AMSJI that led to caudal exposure of the arms was correlated with a thin biotype and the presence of mucositis.

GnRH in the Treatment of Hypogonadotropic Hypogonadism.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) is the focus of the scientific debate for the treatment of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Sexual maturation and reproductive function depend on the pulsatile secretion of GnRH that are mainly congenital and may or may not be associated with other genetic anomalies or syndromes. Clinical manifestations include a wide range of metabolic, endocrine, and psychologic dysfunctions. The following manuscript focuses on the effects of GnRH therapy on fertility and cognitive abilities, aiming to investigate the current level of evidence for this treatment regimen. Current literature has been reviewed with the aim of highlighting the key findings on these two aspects.

Radiographic Evaluation of Bone Remodeling after Additively Manufactured Subperiosteal Jaw Implantation (AMSJI) in the Maxilla: A One-Year Follow-Up Study.

Additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implants (AMSJI) are patient-specific, 3D-printed, titanium implants that provide an alternative solution for patients with severe maxillary bone atrophy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the bony remodeling of the maxillary crest and supporting bone using AMSJI. Fifteen patients with a Cawood-Howell Class V or greater degree of maxillary atrophy were evaluated using (cone beam) computed tomography scans at set intervals: one month (T1) and twelve months (T2) after definitive masticatory loading of bilateral AMSJI implants in the maxilla. The postoperative images were segmented and superimposed on the preoperative images. Fixed evaluation points were determined in advance, and surface comparison was carried out to calculate and visualize the effects of AMSJITM on the surrounding bone. A total mean negative bone remodeling of 0.26 mm (SD 0.65 mm) was seen over six reference points on the crest. Minor bone loss (mean 0.088 mm resorption, SD 0.29 mm) was seen at the supporting bone at the wings and basal frame. We conclude that reconstruction of the severely atrophic maxilla with the AMSJI results in minimal effect on supporting bone. Reduced stress shielding with a biomechanically tuned subperiosteal implant does not induce radiographically significant crestal bone atrophy.

Guidelines for the Use of Resection Guides for Subperiosteal Maxillary Implants in Cases of Terminal Dentition - A Novel Approach.

INTRODUCTION: We described our rationale and experiences with the use of cutting jigs for vertical ostectomy in cases of terminal maxillary dentition when edentulation and an additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implant (AMSJI®) are planned. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our experience covers 15 patients treated by four clinicians. We tabulated our criteria for planning and manufacturing vertical and horizontal ostectomy guides. RESULTS: In order to guarantee accurate osteotomy, titanium guides are preferable to guides made of polymer. The most important consideration is to avoid acute angles in the buccal arms of the AMSJI®. It is up to the surgeon whether to screw-fix the ostectomy guides or to use handles to maintain their position. DISCUSSION: Guided ostectomy has the potential to extend the use of AMSJI® to cases where teeth have yet to be removed or where the contours of the residual bone are not favorable. The use of guided ostectomy in such cases lessens the time between edentulation and implantation and improves the design of the implants.

Computer-Guided Approach for Placement of Zygomatic Implants: Novel Protocol and Surgical Guide.

PURPOSE: This study introduces a novel protocol for the placement of zygomatic implants utilizing presurgical planning with 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT)/cone-beam (CB)CT diagnostic technologies and advanced 3D printing through the development of a specific surgical guide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The protocol relied on large field of view CT/CBCT for an accurate assessment of the maxillary arch to plan zygomatic implant receptor sites. CT/CBCT-derived surgical guides of a novel design were then fabricated using 3D printing technology. An exact replica of the entire maxilla and zygomatic bone was then fabricated in actual scale model size to allow for a simulation of the operation using replicas of implants to be used during the surgical intervention. Guidance was also provided for the sinus fenestration as part of the surgical template. Four patients received a total of 10 zygomatic implants all placed by the same surgeon. RESULTS: Preoperative positions of the zygomatic implants were compared with the postoperative implant positions by merging the pre- and postoperative CT scan datasets. The degree of accuracy of the superimposition was measured utilizing sophisticated software. Apical, coronal, and angular deviations were determined for each implant. Deviations from the computerized project to the actual implant positions ranged from 2 mm to 3 mm with angular deviations ranging between 1.88 and 4.55 degrees. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of zygomatic implants requires surgical experience due to close proximity of vital anatomical structures. This study used methods of superimposition that illustrated satisfactory correspondence between inserted implants and the virtual plan. No adjacent vital anatomical structures were damaged. The novel surgical guide design afforded the surgeon visual control of the drilling protocol. Positioning the guide in close proximity to the entry point of the zygomatic body aided control of the drills up to the vicinity of the exit point, significantly limiting problems associated with angular deviation. Reducing errors and complications is essential for zygomatic implants to remain a viable treatment alternative, and further research on a guided approach to their placement is encouraged.