Consistent Value of Two-Stage Pedicle Flaps in the Age of Microsurgical Maxillofacial Reconstruction

Abstract Introduction Up to the second half of the twentieth century, pedicled flaps marked the gold standard in reconstructive surgery. Followed by the introduction of microsurgical techniques, these flaps were increasingly abandoned. We conducted a retrospective study to determine the value of two-stage pedicle flaps in modern maxillofacial reconstruction. Material & Methods A chart review from October 2017 to November 2020 was performed to identify patients who were treated by a two-stage pedicle flap in our Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. Results A total of 31 patients, 17 female and 14 males received 36 two-stage pedicle flaps. All patients were in noticeably impaired health condition with a majority of ASA-score 3. The defect location mainly contained extraoral resections (58.3%). A variety of flaps were harvested consisting of buccal flaps, Abbe flaps, forehead flaps, deltopectoral flaps, nasolabial flaps, and a tubed flap. Discussion The study outlines two indications for the use of two-stage pedicle flaps. Firstly, as a back-up strategy in heavily pre-treated wound beds and secondly in an almost contrarily indication as a first-choice reconstructive option of the facial skin in esthetic demanding cases. Conclusion The timesaving and straight forward surgical approach as well as their low postsurgical complications and strong long-time success rates secure the two-stage pedicle flap a justified niche role in times of microsurgical maxillofacial reconstruction.

Download Full-text

Main Approaches to the Use of Biomaterials in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: A Brief Systematic Review

MedNEXT Journal of Medical and Health Sciences ◽

10.34256/mdnt2127 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 42-48

Author(s):

Henrique Esteves Magalhães ◽

Priscilla Janaína de Lima Borelli Bovo ◽

Luciano Rodrigues Neves ◽

Marcelo Henrique Batista Santos ◽

Rogério Luiz de Araújo Vian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bone Tissue ◽

Dental Implants ◽

Bone Growth ◽

Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Success Rates ◽

Dental Implantation ◽

Regeneration Of Bone Tissue ◽

Regeneration Of Bone

Introduction: In recent years, procedures with the use of dental implants have increased worldwide, reaching approximately one million dental implants per year. In recent years, a platelet concentrate called FRP (fibrin-rich plasma) has been the subject of clinical studies. Associated with this, the biomaterial Bio-Oss® (Geistlich), as it is biodegradable, biocompatible, non-toxic, and has low immunogenicity, and bio stimulators can act in the regeneration of bone tissue, as it establishes with the cells the appropriate biological niche (favorable microenvironment) for bone growth. Objective: Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate, through a brief systematic review, the results that involve bone formation for dental implantation, with the use of biomaterials such as fibrin-rich plasma and Bio-Oss®. Methods: The model used for the review was PRISMA. Was used databases such as Scopus, Scielo, Lilacs, Google Scholar, PubMed. Results: Fibrin-rich plasma (FRP) as an autologous biomaterial for use in oral and maxillofacial surgery presents most leukocytes, platelets, and growth factors, forming a fibrin matrix, with three-dimensional architecture. The Bio-Oss® biomaterial (Geistlich), as it is biodegradable, biocompatible, non-toxic, and has low immunogenicity and bio stimulators can act in the regeneration of bone tissue, since it establishes with the adenomatous mesenchymal stem cells the appropriate biological niche for bone growth and, thus, allowing the dental implant to be as effective as possible. Conclusion: The use of FRP associated with Bio-Oss® seems to illustrate high success rates with minimal costs, which may reduce the amount of bone graft needed to fill the sinus cavity, reducing the costs of the procedure.

Download Full-text

1359 Everyone Deserves to Smile: An Audit on The Success Rate of Dental Implants in Complex Maxillofacial Patients

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab259.147 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽

Author(s):

P Lugaric ◽

C Frezzini ◽

A Patterson

Keyword(s):

Dental Implants ◽

Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Head And Neck Reconstruction ◽

Success Rates ◽

Native Bone ◽

Local Standard ◽

Edentulous Patients ◽

Surgery Department

Abstract Aim To determine the success rates of dental implants in complex patients treated in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department at Rotherham General Hospital (RGH). Method All patients who received dental implants in the period January 2010 – March 2017 at RGH were included in the audit. Standards 90% local standard Results 68 dental implants were placed in 22 patients: 15 patients head and neck reconstruction, 5 atrophic edentulous patients, 2 trauma. Conclusions Survival rates for dental implants in the literature is variable ranging from 91 -96% in native bone and mucosa and 46 - 98% in irradiated tissue.

Download Full-text

Top 100 Cited Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in The Major Journals of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-127741/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Essam Al-Moraissi ◽

Endi Lanza Galvão ◽

Nikolaos Christidis ◽

Saulo Gabriel Falci

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bibliometric Analysis ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Cosmetic Surgery ◽

Oral Surgery ◽

Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Oral Pathology ◽

Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Success Rates ◽

Oral Radiology

Abstract Background : The aim of this bibliometric research was to identify and analyze the top 100 cited systematic reviews in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Methods : Using the Web of Science-database without restrictions on publication year or language, a bibliometric analysis was performed for the five major journals of oral and maxillofacial surgery: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Cranio-maxillofacial Surgery, British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Surgery Oral medicine Oral pathology Oral radiology. Discussion : The most top-cited systematic review was published in 2015 with a total of 200 citations on survival and success rates of dental implants, consistent with the finding that “pre- and peri-implant surgery and dental implantology”, and “craniomaxillofacial deformities and cosmetic surgery” were the most frequently-cited topics (22% each). The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery displayed both most citations in total and in average per publication. The outcome of this article can be used as a source of information not just for researchers but also for clinicians and students, and of which areas have a large impact on the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery but cannot reflect the quality of the included systematic reviews.Systematic review registration: not applicable

Download Full-text

Flaps for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstruction: Review of Literature and a Clinical Guide to the Clinicians

Asian Journal of Oncology ◽

10.1055/s-0038-1676873 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 04 (02) ◽

pp. 037-042

Author(s):

Gaurav Mittal ◽

Anmol Agarwal ◽

Gaurav Kataria

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Clinical Implications ◽

Review Of Literature ◽

Review Of The Literature ◽

Maxillofacial Reconstruction ◽

Methods Of Reconstruction

AbstractThere are many different ways documented for reconstruction of oral and maxillofacial (OMF) region among which the use of flaps (local or distant) is commonly practiced worldwide. Modern techniques of OMF reconstruction aim to restore function as well as improve aesthetics. This article intends to review the literature on varied flaps used in oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) and summarize their precise clinical implications taking into consideration the ease, difficulties, and the ultimate clinical outcomes. A review of the literature of local or distant flaps used in OMFS was done using Google database. There are many different methods of reconstruction in patients who have had defect in the OMF region due to vascular reasons. It is important for the OMF surgeon who is involved with the management of such patients to have an understanding regarding the choice of flap used to reconstruct such defects.

Download Full-text

Top 100 cited systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the major journals of oral and maxillofacial surgery : a bibliometric analysis

10.1101/2020.12.02.20242503 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Essam Ahmed Almoraissi ◽

Endi Lanza Galvão ◽

Saulo Nikolaos Christidis ◽

Gabriel Moreira Falci

Keyword(s):

Bibliometric Analysis ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Cosmetic Surgery ◽

Oral Surgery ◽

Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Oral Pathology ◽

Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽

Success Rates ◽

Oral Radiology ◽

Meta Analyses

ABSTRACTThe aim of this bibliometric research was to identify and analyze the top 100 cited systematic reviews in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Using the Web of Science-database without restrictions on publication year or language, a bibliometric analysis was performed for the five major journals of oral and maxillofacial surgery: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Journal of Cranio-maxillofacial Surgery, British Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery and Oral Surgery Oral medicine Oral pathology Oral radiology. The most top-cited systematic review was published in 2015 with a total of 200 citations on survival and success rates of dental implants, consistent with the finding that “pre- and peri-implant surgery and dental implantology”, and “craniomaxillofacial deformities and cosmetic surgery” were the most frequently-cited topics (22% each). The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery displayed have got most citations in total and in average per publication. The outcome of this article can be used as a source of information not just for researchers but also for clinicians and students, and of which areas have a large impact on the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery but cannot reflect the quality of the included systematic reviews.

Download Full-text