Fibular Graft-Effective Panorama for Prosthetic Rehabilitation of Resected Mandible.

Surgical management of extensive tumors in the mandibular region leads to massive disfigurement of the face. Also the prosthetic outcome of such patients rehabilitated with free soft tissue flaps is very poor. Reconstruction of extensive defects to overcome the disfigurement is a challenging procedure and can be achieved with free fibula flap. Free fibula graft provides sufficient length of bone for the reconstruction of the postsurgical defects. Excellent vascularity of fibula flap allows for easy uptake of the graft and osseointegration of the dental implants. The addition of a skin island allows for absolute tension-free intraoral closure that enhances tongue mobility. Fibula graft allows proper tissue support after mandibular reconstruction. After rehabilitation with free fibula graft we can plan for prosthodontic rehabilitation with implant retained prosthesis leading to improved masticatory function. It also helps to improve speech outcome as a stable prosthesis can be delivered with the help of implants retained in the fibula graft. It is essential to assess the outcome of surgical reconstruction with fibula graft followed by prosthetic rehabilitation with implant retained prosthesis for their recognition as a treatment of preference. This article details the clinical report along with various clinical parameters for implant retained prosthetic rehabilitation of the patient who had undergone mandibular resection and reconstruction with free fibula graft.

[1]  P. Yadav,et al.  Assessment of Quality of Life After Implant-Retained Prosthetically Reconstructed Maxillae and Mandibles Postcancer Treatments , 2011, Implant dentistry.

[2]  C. Lazarus,et al.  Surgical variables affecting swallowing in patients treated for oral/oropharyngeal cancer , 2004, Head & neck.

[3]  Shih-Hsin Chang,et al.  Swallowing Function in Patients Who Underwent Hemiglossectomy: Comparison of Primary Closure and Free Radial Forearm Flap Reconstruction With Videofluoroscopy , 2003, Annals of plastic surgery.

[4]  Y. Leu,et al.  Primary Closure Versus Radial Forearm Flap Reconstruction After Hemiglossectomy: Functional Assessment of Swallowing and Speech , 2002, Annals of plastic surgery.

[5]  J. J. Coleman,et al.  Predictive factors for functional recovery after free tissue transfer oromandibular reconstruction. , 1998, American journal of surgery.

[6]  A. Rademaker,et al.  Functional results of primary closure vs flaps in oropharyngeal reconstruction: a prospective study of speech and swallowing. , 1998, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[7]  M. Singer,et al.  A comparison of masticatory function in patients with or without reconstruction of the mandible , 1997, Head & neck.

[8]  M T Marunick,et al.  Masticatory function in hemimandibulectomy patients. , 1992, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[9]  D. Hidalgo Aesthetic improvements in free-flap mandible reconstruction. , 1991, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[10]  J. Teichgraeber,et al.  A comparison of three methods of oral reconstruction. , 1987, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[11]  D. Shedd,et al.  Disability and rehabilitation in head and neck cancer patients after treatment. , 1978, Head & neck surgery.

[12]  W. G. Shafer,et al.  Textbook of Oral Pathology , 1974 .