BackgroundPost ablative oral mucosal defect resulting from the removal of tumors can be treated with various techniques.PurposeIn 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 methodsPatients 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.ResultsMost 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.ConclusionsGiven 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.
Dermal regeneration template: reconstruction in oral cancer defects / Mangini, Nicolò; Galvano, Francesca; Pucci, Resi; Battisti, Andrea; Cassoni, Andrea; Valentini, Valentino. - In: JOURNAL OF MAXILLOFACIAL & ORAL SURGERY. - ISSN 0972-8279. - 22:Suppl 1(2023), pp. 151-156. [10.1007/s12663-023-01889-5]
Dermal regeneration template: reconstruction in oral cancer defects
Francesca Galvano
Secondo
;Resi Pucci;Andrea Battisti;Andrea CassoniPenultimo
;Valentino ValentiniUltimo
2023
Abstract
BackgroundPost ablative oral mucosal defect resulting from the removal of tumors can be treated with various techniques.PurposeIn 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 methodsPatients 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.ResultsMost 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.ConclusionsGiven 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.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Mangini_Dermal Regeneration Template_2023.pdf
accesso aperto
Note: Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
712.82 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
712.82 kB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.