Microbial Analysis of Obturators During Maxillofacial Prosthodontic Treatment Over an 8-Year Period.

The aim of the study was to investigate the microbial colonization (by Candida species, anaerobic and facultative anaerobic bacteria) of maxillary obturators used for the restoration of maxillary defects, including during radiotherapy.Retrospective cohort study.Fifteen patients requiring a maxillary obturator prosthesis had swabs of their obturators and adjacent tissues taken at different stages of their treatment over a period of 8 years.Identification of microbial species from the swabs was carried out using randomly amplified polymorphic DNA polymerase chain reaction (RAPD PCR) analysis, checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization, CHROMagar Candida chromogenic agar, and DNA sequencing.Candida species were detected in all patients and all patients developed mucositis and candidiasis during radiotherapy which was associated with an increase in colonization of surfaces with Candida spp., particularly C albicans. Microbial colonization increased during radiotherapy and as an obturator aged, and decreased following a reline, delivery of a new prosthesis, or antifungal treatment during radiotherapy.Microbial colonization of maxillary obturators was related to the stage of treatment, age of the obturator material, radiotherapy and antifungal medications, and antifungal treatment may be recommended if C albicans colonization of palatal tissues is greater than 105 colony-forming units per cm2 following the first week of radiotherapy.

An implant-retained auricular prosthesis complicated by a modified temporal bone resection.

A patient underwent a modified temporal bone resection and total auriculectomy to remove a sebaceous carcinoma arising from the tragus of the right auricle that extended into the external auditory meatus. Because the tumor extended into the temporal bone, the osseous sites originally selected for immediate placement of the craniofacial implants were resected and no longer available. Subsequently, after an appropriate period of healing, implants were placed into the residual temporal bone, considerably more superior and posterior to the external auditory meatus such that they emerged through hair-bearing skin. The purpose of this report was to describe the fabrication of an implant-retained auricular prosthesis with implants in suboptimal positions. Challenges included optimization of the stability and retention of the prosthesis, effectively managing the prosthetic space without compromising the esthetic outcome, providing adequate hygiene access for the implant connecting bar, and maintaining the health of the peri-implant tissues when the implant emerged through hair-bearing skin.

The Role of Biofilms and Material Surface Characteristics in Microbial Adhesion to Maxillary Obturator Materials: A Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Maxillofacial prosthetics includes restoration of maxillary defects resulting from resection of palate and nasosinus neoplasms with obturator prostheses which may be colonized by microorganisms and function as a reservoir of infection. Patients with neoplasms commonly also require radiotherapy that can result in changes in saliva quality and quantity and changes in the oral microbial flora. The altered flora, in individuals immunocompromised from cancer therapy, increases their risk of prosthesis-related infections. OBJECTIVES: In this review article, we explore microbial biofilms, their main components, mechanisms of microbial adhesion, and stages of biofilm development. We also discuss the different materials that are used for manufacturing maxillary obturators, their characteristic features, and how these can affect microbial adhesion. Furthermore, we shed some light on the factors that affect microbial adhesion to the surface of maxillary obturators including tissue proteins, protein adsorption, and the acquired enamel pellicle. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions drawn from this literature review are that it is imperative to minimize the risk of local and systemic infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer having maxillary defects. It is also important to determine the role of saliva in microbial adhesion to obturator materials as well as develop materials that have a longer life span with surface characteristics that promote less microbial adhesion than current materials.

Brachytherapy-mediated bone damage in a rat model investigating maxillary osteoradionecrosis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess clinical and radiologic findings from targeted radiotherapy to the rat maxilla and to compare findings with a recently developed rat model of mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN). DESIGN: A prospective, controlled animal study. SUBJECTS: Ten male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into an experimental group receiving catheter-assisted high-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 6) and a control group with catheter-assisted sham therapy (n = 4). INTERVENTIONS: The second left maxillary molar was extracted 1 week after radiation, and the maxilla was harvested 3 weeks after dental extraction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: We used a standardized method with micro-computed tomography to determine the ratio of bone volume to total volume of the dental extraction socket. RESULTS: On the gross clinical examination, all rats had mucosal coverage of the dental extraction site, whereas only the brachytherapy group demonstrated scarring of the mucosa. The median bone volume to total volume was 0.21 for the brachytherapy group and 0.49 for the control group (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to the mandible, the maxilla is susceptible to radiogenic bone injury as demonstrated by the significant decrease in bone volume of the radiated dental extraction socket. Despite radiologic similarities to mandibular ORN in the rat model, the maxilla demonstrated a more benign clinical course with a complete absence of bone exposure. Differences in the maxillary bone and microenvironment of the maxilla compared with the mandible may explain the subclinical response to radiation and lower incidence of maxillary ORN seen in patients. This maxillary model can be combined with our high-dose-rate mandibular ORN model to investigate these differences and better understand ORN.

Standardized analysis of mandibular osteoradionecrosis in a rat model.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a rat model of mandibular osteoradionecrosis(ORN) that uses novel micro-computed tomography bone volume analysis and detailed histology to provide a more effective, quantifiable, and standardized way to study ORN in vivo. STUDY DESIGN: Animal model. SETTING: Academic medical center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Modifications to our previously published rat model of mandibular ORN were done to develop an ideal protocol consisting of 10 rats (6 experimental and 4 controls) with their left middle mandibular molar removed 7 days after either 20 Gy high dose rate brachytherapy or sham irradiation. Rats were sacrificed 21 days after extraction for landmark defined bone volume and histologic analysis. RESULTS: A standardized method of quantification was achieved in all samples. The radiated group (XRT) had a mean bone volume/total volume (BV/TV) of 13.8% compared to 65.9% for controls (P < .001). There were increases in osteoclasts and fibrosis, decreases in osteoblasts,and less bone in radiated samples with a mean (SD)of 5.91 (3.77) osteoclasts/high-powered field (HPF) and 4.00(1.83) osteoblasts/HPF in XRT samples compared to 1.08(1.08) osteoclasts/HPF and 22.49 (6.00) osteoblasts/HPF for controls (P <.001). CONCLUSION: Our updated model continues to be clinically analogous to human mandibular ORN and improves the radiologic and histologic analysis of bony defects, providing a method for quantification of bone loss. Further cell-specific staining, including immunohistochemistry, can be used with this model to study potential cellular mechanisms of mandibular ORN and test any future therapeutic options.

Animal model of radiogenic bone damage to study mandibular osteoradionecrosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to create an animal model to study mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN) using high-dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy. METHODS: Ten Sprague-Dawley male rats were used in this study. Six rats received a single dose of 30 Gy using an HDR remote afterloading machine via a brachytherapy catheter placed along the left hemimandible. The remaining 4 rats served as controls with catheter placement without radiation (sham). On the day following irradiation or sham, all 3 left mandibular molars were atraumatically extracted. Twenty-eight days after irradiation, mandibles were examined using nondecalcified histology with sequential fluorochrome labeling, decalcified histology, and micro-computed tomography scanning. RESULTS: Irradiated rats demonstrated exposed bone at the extraction sockets, whereas the control animals had complete mucosalization. Alopecia was also seen in the irradiated group. Both histologic and radiologic analyses of the mandible specimens demonstrated a reduction in bone formation in the radiated mandibles as compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: Our HDR brachytherapy model incorporating postradiation dental extractions has successfully demonstrated reproducible radiogenic mandibular bone damage analogous to the clinical ORN. Although clinical criteria continue to be used today in describing ORN, this model can serve as a platform for future studies to define ORN and delineate its pathogenesis.

Mandibular fracture in conjunction with bicortical penetration, using wide-diameter endosseous dental implants.

Prosthodontic rehabilitation of a patient with an atrophic edentulous mandible presents a significant challenge in restoring esthetics and function. The purpose of this clinical report is to describe fracture of an atrophic edentulous mandible opposing maxillary natural dentition in association with endosseous dental implants. The patient received two wide-diameter implants in the anterior mandible for an implant-assisted mandibular overdenture, in which the implants penetrated the inferior border of the mandible for bicortical stabilization. Three months following implant placement surgery, the patient experienced pain, swelling, and intraoral purulent drainage around the right implant. Panoramic radiograph revealed a fracture of the mandible through the right implant site and signs of infection around the left implant. The implants were removed surgically, and open reduction and fixation of the fracture site were undertaken using a titanium bone fixation plate. This clinical report demonstrates that placement of wide-diameter implants in conjunction with bicortical penetration in a severely atrophic edentulous mandible can risk fracture of the mandible.

Maxillofacial restoration after head and neck tumor therapy.

Oral and pharyngeal cancers are among the leading cancer sites. Surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, or combination therapies are common treatment modalities. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy cause significant morbidity and long-term irreversible sequelae in the oral cavity. Surgical resection can be mutilating, disfiguring, and deeply affect self-image. Orofacial defects have unique limitations and challenges for both the surgeon and the maxillofacial prosthodontist. Microvascular surgical techniques and the use of osseointegrated implants improve the rehabilitation potential of the various head and neck defects. This article reviews current treatment modalities of tumor therapy, their consequences, and the restoration of maxillofacial defects.

Use of osseointegrated implants in the restoration of head and neck defects.

Osseointegrated implants can be applied to facilitate retention, stability, and support for facial and intraoral prostheses used to restore head and neck defects. At the University of California, Los Angeles, Maxillofacial Prosthetics Clinic, retrospective studies have indicated that in nonirradiated maxillectomy patients, implant survival rates are 82.6 percent. In mandibles reconstructed with fibula free flaps, survival rates are 94.6 percent. Similarly, high implant survival rates have been observed for most sites used to support facial prostheses. Cumulative six-year survival rates for auricular sites exceed 95 percent and for floor of nose sites, success rates exceed 87 percent. However, survival rates are low (53 percent) for implants placed in the frontal bone for retention of orbital prostheses and even lower for irradiated bone sites ranging from 63 percent in the maxilla to 27 percent in the orbit.

Masticatory and swallowing threshold performances with conventional and implant-supported prostheses after mandibular fibula free-flap reconstruction.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Significant strides in microvascular surgical techniques allow predictable restoration of bony and soft tissue orofacial defects. In combination with prosthetic rehabilitation, varying degrees of improvement in esthetics, speech intelligibility, and swallowing have been noted; however, the relative impact of conventional and implant-supported prostheses on restoration of masticatory function are not known. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether conventional or implant-supported dental prostheses and current surgical reconstructive procedures restore patients' masticatory function to presurgical levels. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Of the 46 subjects enrolled in this study, 23 (7 edentulous and 16 partially dentate) completed conventional prosthesis (CP) treatment and masticatory evaluation, and of these, 15 (3 edentulous and 12 partially dentate) completed treatment and evaluation with an implant-supported prosthesis (IP). Standardized masticatory performance tests with peanuts and carrots as the test food were made on the defect and nondefect sides. Tests of swallowing threshold performance were made with carrots as the test food. Statistical analysis included repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc Tukey HSD tests (alpha=.05). RESULTS: Masticatory function at entry was markedly compromised. Further performance declines were noted following surgery (PS) on both the defect and nondefect sides. Restoration with CP and IP produced improvements (significant for defect side only, P<.05) in performance over the PS interval and were not significantly different from performances at entry prior to surgery. In addition, the performance on the defect side with the IP was significantly greater than the performance with the CP (P<.001). CONCLUSION: Impairment in masticatory ability remains following free-flap reconstruction prior to prosthetic rehabilitation. Both CP and IP may provide improved masticatory ability, permitting patients to regain the functional level they possessed prior to surgical intervention. The IP may contribute to greater support and stability of the prosthesis, resulting in increased use for mastication and superior performance on the defect side compared to the CP.

Efficacy of conventional and implant-supported mandibular resection prostheses: study overview and treatment outcomes.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: While surgical restoration of mandibular resections has advanced dramatically with free-flap techniques, oral function and patient perceptions of function, as well as treatment outcomes, often indicate significant impairment. PURPOSE: This longitudinal prospective study was designed to determine whether conventional prostheses (CP) or implant-supported prostheses (IP) and current surgical reconstructive procedures restore patients' oral functions and quality of life to their status prior to segmental mandibulectomy with immediate fibula free-flap reconstruction. Study design and implementation, characteristics of the study sample, treatment completion rates, and selected presurgical and postsurgical functional and perceptual outcomes are presented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-six subjects were enrolled. Longitudinal evaluations of medical and dental histories, oromaxillofacial examinations, questionnaires, and sensory and functional tests were planned before and after surgery and after CP and IP treatment. Sample characteristics are described with descriptive statistics and comparisons of subject responses to questionnaire items at entry and postsurgical intervals were made with Fisher exact tests (alpha=.05). RESULTS: Conventional prostheses were completed in 33 of 46 subjects, and 16 of 33 CP subjects were treated with IP. Reasons for noncompletion of IP were recurrent/metastatic disease (16), refusal of implant therapy (7), lost to follow-up (4), treatment with a reconstruction plate (1), excessive radiation at implant sites (1), and death (1). All 16 recurrences/metastases occurred within 13 months of surgery. Only 3 of the 58 implants placed in 17 participants were considered failures. One failed due to lack of integration 31 weeks following placement, and 2 were buried due to unacceptable positioning for prosthetic restoration during denture fabrication. The remaining 55 implants were successful at final evaluation, ranging from 58 to 123 weeks following implant placement (mean duration=78.9 +/- 16.0 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: While 72% (33/46) of the subjects enrolled were able and willing to complete treatment with CP, only 35% (16/46) completed IP treatment. Careful consideration must be given to selection of the type of prosthetic rehabilitation and the timing of implant placement if an IP is planned.

Histomorphometric and fluorescence microscopic evaluation of interfacial bone healing around 3 different dental implants before and after radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy influence on bone healing around 3 types of endosseous dental implants in dogs was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants with 3 different surfaces (A = machined commercially pure titanium screws, B = commercially pure titanium plasma spray-coated cylinders, C = hydroxyapatite [HA] -ceramic coated cylinders) were first implanted unilaterally into the right posterior edentulous mandibles of 7 dogs as nonirradiated controls. After 12 weeks without functional loading and after sequential fluorochrome labeling these implants were retrieved by block dissection. In this same surgery, implants were placed on the contralateral side. Three weeks postimplantation the implant-containing hemimandibles were Cobalt 60 irradiated with the biologic equivalent of 5,000 cGy. Twelve weeks postimplantation and after labeling these irradiated implants were retrieved at sacrifice. On scanning electron, light, and fluorescence microscopic images of undecalcified longitudinal ground sections of the implants with surrounding tissues, percent bone-to-implant contact (% BIC), bone formation, and remodeling were histometrically and subjectively evaluated. RESULTS: Woven bone formation started 1 week after implantation at the implant interfaces on both the nonirradiated and the irradiated sides. Average BICs (total/cortical/spongious bone bed) of 26%/49%/36% for surface A, 46%/48%/64% for surface B, and 81%/83%/78% for surface C were observed. In the irradiated hemimandibles average BICs (total/cortical/spongious bone bed) were reduced to 11%/9%/4% for surface A, 43%/46%/43% for surface B, and 63%/85%/76% for surface C, with increased resorption of peri-implant bone and retarded bone formation after irradiation. DISCUSSION: Reductions of total % BIC in all irradiated implants, though not statistically significant, were significant (P < or = .05) on implant surfaces A and B in the spongious bone bed. CONCLUSION: Retarded bone formation on surfaces A and B in the spongious bone bed represented a more radiation-sensitive situation at the time of radiation onset compared to advanced bone formation and maturation at surface C.

Treatment satisfaction with facial prostheses.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Facial defects secondary to the treatment of neoplasms, congenital malformations, and trauma result in multiple functional and psychosocial difficulties. Prosthetic rehabilitation attempts to restore these facial disfigurements and may improve the level of function and self-esteem for these patients. However, a limited number of studies have evaluated the change in perceived quality of life after maxillofacial prosthetic rehabilitation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients' perceptions of treatment with adhesive-retained and implant-retained facial prostheses and to assess differences in overall satisfaction with these 2 types of treatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, a questionnaire with 28 items was administered for evaluation of perceptions of appearance, comfort, fit and irritation, reliability of retention, frequency of wear, ease of placement and removal, level of self-consciousness, and value of treatment. Subjects were categorized into 2 groups: adhesive-retained group (n=16) and implant-retained group (n=19). Comparisons were made for each item in the questionnaire using Fisher exact tests (alpha=.05). RESULTS: The implant group reported higher positive ratings on all 28 questionnaire items when compared with the adhesive group. Statistically significant (P<.05) differences between the implant and adhesive groups were noted for ease of placement and removal, frequency of wear at home, and quality of retention during various activities, such as home chores and when perspiring or sneezing/coughing. CONCLUSION: The implant-retained facial prosthesis offers significant enhancement over an adhesive-retained prosthesis with respect to ease of use and retention during a variety of daily activities, resulting in greater use of the prosthesis.

Osseointegrated craniofacial implants in the rehabilitation of orbital defects: an update of a retrospective experience in the United States.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Since their introduction, craniofacial implants have been used in prosthetic rehabilitation of facial defects. The literature, however, indicates marked variability in outcomes using implants for the retention of orbital prostheses. PURPOSE: A multicenter report updating the experience in the United States with the use of craniofacial implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects is presented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Surveys were sent to clinicians at 25 centers where maxillofacial prosthetic treatment is provided to obtain retrospective data regarding patients who completed implant-retained orbital prosthetic rehabilitation. Data on implant placement location, radiation treatment history, and use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy were collected and assessed in relationship to implant survival over time. The Kaplan-Meier life table and Wilcoxon analyses (alpha = .05) were used to assess the significance of the findings. RESULTS: Ten centers responded, providing data suitable for statistical analysis on 153 implants placed to retain 44 orbital prostheses and followed for a mean period of 52.6 months. Forty-one implant integration failures occurred during this follow-up period, resulting in an overall integration survival rate of 73.2%. No significant relationship was found between radiation treatment history, hyperbaric oxygen therapy history, or implant placement location and implant survival. Individual responses revealed large variability between reporting centers in treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: Craniofacial implants may offer marked benefits in the prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects when compared to conventional adhesive retention designs. However, questions remain regarding long-term predictability and the impact specific factors may have on treatment outcomes. Insufficient data is currently available from which to draw statistically meaningful conclusions. The establishment of a national database designed to acquire adequate data to assess treatment outcomes is recommended.

Implant-retained prostheses for facial defects: an up to 14-year follow-up report on the survival rates of implants at UCLA.

PURPOSE: An analysis of retrospective data was conducted to establish the survival rates of osseointegrated implants used to retain orbital, nasal, and auricular prostheses over a 14-year period and to recommend guidelines in the restorative treatment of such facial defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included in this study were all patients who received implant-retained prostheses for auricular, nasal, or orbital defects from 1987 to 2001 in the Maxillofacial Clinics at the UCLA and City of Hope Medical Centers. Data were obtained from patient charts. Two methods were used to determine survival rates: (1) the percentage of the total exposed implants that survived was determined, and (2) life table analysis was used to calculate cumulative survival rates at different time intervals. RESULTS: A total of 207 implants were placed in 72 patients, and 182 implants had been uncovered. During the study period, 35 implants failed to integrate, and the survival rate for all exposed implants was 80%. Auricular implants showed the highest survival rate (95%), and orbital implants showed the lowest survival rate (53%). The life table analysis demonstrated a cumulative 6-year survival rate of 92% for auricular implants and 87% for piriform/nasal implants. In contrast, the survival rate for orbital implants showed a steady downward trend and reached 59% at 66 months. CONCLUSION: It is possible to achieve high survival rates of implants in the auricular and piriform/nasal sites through careful presurgical and radiographic planning. The less favorable long-term survival of implants in the orbital rim, especially at irradiated sites, requires further study.