RESUMO
Introduction and importance: Ablative surgery for oral cancer, irrespective of the histological subtype, causes large tissue defects, functional and aesthetic damage. Microsurgical free flaps have been widely used in reconstruction after resection, with satisfactory success rates in conjunction with adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). This study aims to describe our clinical institutional experience based on the multimodal treatment performed in four cases diagnosed with oral squamous cell carcinoma with the use of different microvascular free flaps and RT. Case series presentation: Four patients underwent reconstructive microsurgery after surgical resection of oral cancer, using three types of free flap: radial forearm fasciocutaneous, osteomyocutaneous fibular, and anterolateral thigh musculocutaneous flaps; RT was performed in Case 2 and Case 3. In the period of 3 years after microsurgical reconstruction and RT, flaps remain clinically stable without failure signs in full patients submitted to multimodal treatment. Clinical discussion: After resection of oral carcinomas, extensive tissue defects can be successfully treated with reconstructive microsurgery using different types of microvascular free flaps. RT for locoregional control is a feasible option and did not seem to interfere with the survival of flaps. Conclusion: An enhance long-term follow-up to assess overall and disease-free survival rates and quality of life must be carried out; however, cohort studies would be necessary for better understanding of the role of each treatment in the multimodal scheme.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To investigate the survival rate in implants placement in irradiated and non-irradiated bone in patients undergoing head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. We focused on the consequences of the main complications, such as osteoradionecrosis and peri-implantitis. METHODS: An electronic search conducted by PRISMA protocol was performed. Full texts were carefully assessed, and data were assimilated into a tabular form for discussion and consensus among the expert panel. The quality assessment and the risk of bias are verified by Joanna Briggs Institute checklist (JBI) and The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool. RESULTS: A total of 452 records were identified in the based on our PICOs strategy and after screening, 19 articles were included in the descriptive analysis of the review. Totaling 473 implants placed in irradiated and non-irradiated bone, and 31.6% of the patients were over 60 years of age. 57.9%) performed implant placement in a period of 12 months or more after the ending of radiotherapy. Only 5 studies had a follow-up period longer than 5 years after implant placement, of which three were used for the meta-analysis. In the meta-analysis of 5-year survival rate, analysis of implants in irradiated bone was assessed; a random effect model was used and a weighted proportion (PP) of 93.13% (95% CI: 87.20-99.06; p < 0.001), and in the 5-year survival rate, analysis of implants in non-irradiated bone was analysed; a fixed effect model was used and a weighted proportion (PP) of 98.52% survival (95% CI: 97.56-99.48, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival rates of implants placed in irradiated bone are clinically satisfactory after a follow-up of 5 years, with a fewer percentage than in implants placed in non-irradiated bone after metanalyses performed.
