ABSTRACT
Background: Post ablative oral mucosal defect resulting from the removal of tumors can be treated with various techniques. Purpose: In this paper, we are showing what, in our experience, are the advantages and disadvantages given using biosynthetic skin substitutes when dealing with this kind of lesions. Materials and methods: Patients included in the sample came to our attention with both neoplastic lesions (11 subjects) and important scar retraction after previous oncologic surgery (1 subject). All patients underwent trans-oral resection surgery following the same surgical protocol and post ablative oral mucosal defect were treated using the dermal regeneration template. The surgical defect location, size, and time of removal of the silicone layer varied from one subject to the other. Results: Most patients showed good healing with reduced scarring and adequate remucosalisation of the defect. The main complications were shown in a palatal lesion treated with concomitant osteal resection, which developed an oroantral fistula at follow up, and tongue lesions which showed some scarring. Conclusions: Given our experience, we would advise using dermal substitutes when reconstructing oral defects only after a cautious evaluation of the area of the lesion, the gap size, the possible adherence of the membrane to the gap, and the presence of tissue supporting the overlying membrane.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected the surgical units, especially those operating on the airways. This study evaluates the series of patients with tumors of the head and neck treated by our unit during Phase-1 of the pandemic and the efficacy of the preventive measures implemented for protecting both the patients and staff. A screening program was administered to all the patients who had to undergo surgery. None of the patients tested and operated during Phase 1, between 10 March and 18 May 2020, were positive for COVID-19. A significant portion of the patients was suffering from tumors in advanced stages (T3 and T4). Two patients developed respiratory symptoms during their stay at the unit, so they were put in precautionary isolation and tested, but resulted negative for COVID-19. All the surgical department staff followed the Italian Ministry of Health's prevention protocol and underwent serological testing. IgG and IgM were negative in everyone, thus confirming that nobody had been exposed to the virus. This study highlights the commitment to efficiently treating patients suffering from tumors of the head and neck region and confirms the effectiveness of the safety measures used to protect our patients and staff's health.
ABSTRACT
Head and Neck osteosarcoma is an uncommon disease. Hitherto, the treatment is surgical resection and survival is influenced by the presence of free margins. However, the dimension of the resection may represent a hurdle for an adequate Quality of Life (QOL). Maxillofacial district is a narrow space where the function, esthetics and patient's relational skills fit together like the gears of a clock. The functional results depend on the type of reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation that are both important to guarantee a good aesthetic result and finally increase the patient's self-esteem. This study aims to report our experience about head and neck (HN) osteosarcoma focusing the attention on reconstructive and dental-rehabilitative problems. It is a retrospective study all patients were surgically treated in our department. Subjects with histological diagnosis of HN osteosarcoma, treated between 2005 and 2017 were included. The demographic characteristics, surgical treatment, eventually secondary reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation, performed in the same department, have been collected. The QOL was assessed through the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck 35) questionnaire. Fifteen patients were enrolled, eight received a free flap microsurgical reconstruction. Dental rehabilitation was performed in five cases and a mobile prosthesis was always delivered. Eighteen implants were inserted in fibula bones for three patients; highly porous implants were used.
