Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Jun 21:4:37.
doi: 10.1186/1758-3284-4-37.

Analysis of the compatibility of dental implant systems in fibula free flap reconstruction

Ramin Carbiner  1 , Waseem Jerjes, Kaveh Shakib, Peter V Giannoudis, Colin Hopper
Affiliations

Analysis of the compatibility of dental implant systems in fibula free flap reconstruction

Ramin Carbiner et al. Head Neck Oncol. .

Expression of concern in

  • Comment: Head and Neck Oncology.
    BioMed Central. BioMed Central. BMC Med. 2014 Feb 5;12:24. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-12-24. BMC Med. 2014. PMID: 24499430 Free PMC article. Review.

Abstract

As a result of major ablative surgery, head and neck oncology patients can be left with significant defects in the orofacial region. The resultant defect raises the need for advanced reconstruction techniques. The reconstruction in this region is aimed at restoring function and facial contour. The use of vascularised free flaps has revolutionised the reconstruction in the head and neck. Advances in reconstruction techniques have resulted in continuous improvement of oral rehabilitation. For example, endosteal implants are being used to restore the masticatory function by the way of prosthetic replacement of the dentition. Implant rehabilitation usually leads to improved facial appearance, function, restoration of speech and mastication. Suitable dental implant placement's site requires satisfactory width, height and quality of bone. Reconstruction of hard tissue defects therefore will need to be tailored to meet the needs for implant placement.The aim of this feasibility study was to assess the compatibility of five standard commercially available dental implant systems (Biomet 3i, Nobel Biocare, Astra tech, Straumann and Ankylos) for placement into vascularised fibula graft during the reconstruction of oromandibular region.Radiographs (2D) of the lower extremities from 142 patients in the archives of the Department of Radiology in University College London Hospitals (UCLH) were analysed in this study. These radiographs were from 61 females and 81 males. Additionally, 60 unsexed dry fibular bones, 30 right sided, acquired from the collection of the Department of Anatomy, University College London (UCL) were also measured to account for the 3D factor.In the right fibula (dry bone), 90% of the samples measured had a width of 13.1 mm. While in the left fibula (dry bone), 90% of the samples measured had a width of 13.3 mm. Fibulas measured on radiographs had a width of 14.3 mm in 90% of the samples. The length ranges of the dental implants used in this study were: 7-13 mm (Biomet 3i), 10-13 mm (Nobel biocare), 8-13 mm (Astra Tech), 8-12 mm (Straumann ) and 8-11 mm (Ankylos).This study reached a conclusion that the width of fibula is sufficient for placement of most frequently used dental implants for oral rehabilitation after mandibular reconstructive procedures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Left fibula bone (top) and a right fibula (bottom).
Figure 2
Figure 2
T4 SCC floor of mouth and alveolus.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Right neck dissection levels I-IV.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Dissected fibula ready for harvesting.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Harvested vascular fibular pedicle.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Reconstruction plate in place.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Anastomised fibular pedicle in placed.
Figure 8
Figure 8
OPG shows a reconstructed mandible with vascularised fibula free flap after hemimandiblectomy as result of cancer surgery.
Figure 9
Figure 9
AP X-ray shows tibia and fibula.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Breine U, Brånemark PI. Reconstruction of alveolar jaw bone. An experimental and clinical study of immediate and preformed autologous bone grafts in combination with osteointegrated implants. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1980;14(1):23–48. doi: 10.3109/02844318009105733. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen ZW, Yan W. The study and clinical application of the osteocutaneous flap of fibula. Microsurgery. 1983;4(1):11–16. doi: 10.1002/micr.1920040107. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chiapasco M, Abati S, Ramundo G, Rossi A, Romeo E, Vogel G. Behavior of implants in bone grafts or free flaps after tumor resection. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(1):66–75. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011001066.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chiapasco M, Biglioli F, Autelitano L, Romeo E, Brusati R. Clinical outcome of dental implants placed in fibula-free flaps used for the reconstruction of maxillo-mandibular defects following ablation for tumors or osteoradionecrosis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006;17(2):220–228. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01212.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Friberg B, Jemt T. Rehabilitation of edentulous mandibles by means of five TiUnite implants after one-stage surgery: a 1-year retrospective study of 90 patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2008;10(1):47–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2007.00060.x. - DOI - PubMed