Cargando…

Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort

BACKGROUND: The study reports on implant survival outcomes in head and neck cancer patients who received implant-based oral rehabilitation in a regional service centre. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of implant survival outcomes in patients treated in a regional service from 2012 to 2017 was perf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Laverty, Dominic P., Addison, Owen, Wubie, Berhanu A., Heo, Giseon, Parmar, Sat, Martin, Timothy, Praveen, Prav, Pearson, David, Newsum, David, Murphy, Michael, Bateman, Geoffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6399356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30834461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0161-y
_version_ 1783399744467369984
author Laverty, Dominic P.
Addison, Owen
Wubie, Berhanu A.
Heo, Giseon
Parmar, Sat
Martin, Timothy
Praveen, Prav
Pearson, David
Newsum, David
Murphy, Michael
Bateman, Geoffrey
author_facet Laverty, Dominic P.
Addison, Owen
Wubie, Berhanu A.
Heo, Giseon
Parmar, Sat
Martin, Timothy
Praveen, Prav
Pearson, David
Newsum, David
Murphy, Michael
Bateman, Geoffrey
author_sort Laverty, Dominic P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The study reports on implant survival outcomes in head and neck cancer patients who received implant-based oral rehabilitation in a regional service centre. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of implant survival outcomes in patients treated in a regional service from 2012 to 2017 was performed. The primary outcome measure was implant survival. The secondary outcome measure was to assess the effect of covariates associated with implant failure including bone type, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, gender and surgical implant complications. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were applied to compare differences in the survival rates of groups of variables. Cox proportional hazards models were applied to identify covariates associated with implant failure. p value was set at 0.05. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 167 head and neck cancer patients who had 779 dental implants placed. Implant survival estimates were calculated: 3 years, 95.7% [95%CI 94.3–97.2%] and 5 years, 95.5% [95%CI 93.9–97.0%], with a median follow-up of 38 months. Gender (p = 0.09), radiotherapy (p = 0.16) and chemotherapy (p = 0.17) did not significantly influence implant survival, whereas implant failure was higher in transported (reconstructed) bone sites in comparison with native bone (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The result of this study suggests that overall implant survival as part of the routine oral rehabilitation is high in this patient cohort; however, implant failure was found to be statistically higher for implant placed into transported bone in comparison to native bone.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6399356
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63993562019-03-22 Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort Laverty, Dominic P. Addison, Owen Wubie, Berhanu A. Heo, Giseon Parmar, Sat Martin, Timothy Praveen, Prav Pearson, David Newsum, David Murphy, Michael Bateman, Geoffrey Int J Implant Dent Research BACKGROUND: The study reports on implant survival outcomes in head and neck cancer patients who received implant-based oral rehabilitation in a regional service centre. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of implant survival outcomes in patients treated in a regional service from 2012 to 2017 was performed. The primary outcome measure was implant survival. The secondary outcome measure was to assess the effect of covariates associated with implant failure including bone type, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, gender and surgical implant complications. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were applied to compare differences in the survival rates of groups of variables. Cox proportional hazards models were applied to identify covariates associated with implant failure. p value was set at 0.05. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 167 head and neck cancer patients who had 779 dental implants placed. Implant survival estimates were calculated: 3 years, 95.7% [95%CI 94.3–97.2%] and 5 years, 95.5% [95%CI 93.9–97.0%], with a median follow-up of 38 months. Gender (p = 0.09), radiotherapy (p = 0.16) and chemotherapy (p = 0.17) did not significantly influence implant survival, whereas implant failure was higher in transported (reconstructed) bone sites in comparison with native bone (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The result of this study suggests that overall implant survival as part of the routine oral rehabilitation is high in this patient cohort; however, implant failure was found to be statistically higher for implant placed into transported bone in comparison to native bone. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC6399356/ /pubmed/30834461 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0161-y Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Laverty, Dominic P.
Addison, Owen
Wubie, Berhanu A.
Heo, Giseon
Parmar, Sat
Martin, Timothy
Praveen, Prav
Pearson, David
Newsum, David
Murphy, Michael
Bateman, Geoffrey
Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title_full Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title_fullStr Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title_short Outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
title_sort outcomes of implant-based oral rehabilitation in head and neck oncology patients—a retrospective evaluation of a large, single regional service cohort
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6399356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30834461
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0161-y
work_keys_str_mv AT lavertydominicp outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT addisonowen outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT wubieberhanua outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT heogiseon outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT parmarsat outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT martintimothy outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT praveenprav outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT pearsondavid outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT newsumdavid outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT murphymichael outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort
AT batemangeoffrey outcomesofimplantbasedoralrehabilitationinheadandneckoncologypatientsaretrospectiveevaluationofalargesingleregionalservicecohort