Background: Mandibular defects resulting from oncological treatment pose significant aesthetic and functional challenges due to the involvement of bone and soft tissues. Immediate reconstruction is crucial to address complications such as malocclusion, mandibular deviation, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) changes, and soft tissue retraction. These issues can lead to functional impairments, including difficulties in chewing, swallowing, and speech. The fibula flap is widely used for mandibular reconstruction due to its long bone segment and robust vascular supply, though it may not always provide adequate bone height for optimal dental rehabilitation. This systematic review aims to determine if the double-barreled fibula flap (DBFF) configuration is a viable alternative for mandibular reconstruction and to evaluate the outcomes of dental implants placed in this type of flap. Materials and Methods: This study adhered to the Cochrane Collaboration criteria and PRISMA guidelines and was registered on the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols Database (INPLASY2023120026). We included clinical studies published in English, Spanish, or French that focused on adult patients undergoing segmental mandibulectomy followed by DBFF reconstruction and dental rehabilitation. Data sources included Medline/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, and manual searches. Two reviewers independently screened and selected studies, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. Data extraction captured variables such as publication year, patient demographics, number of implants, follow-up duration, flap survival, implant failure, and aesthetic outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the JBI appraisal tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Results: A total of 17 clinical studies were included, evaluating 245 patients and 402 dental implants. The average patient age was 43.7 years, with a mean follow-up period of 34.3 months. Flap survival was high, with a 98.3% success rate and only four flap losses. The implant failure rate was low at 1.74%. Esthetic outcomes were varied, with only three studies using standardized protocols for evaluation. The overall certainty of evidence for flap survival was moderate, low for implant failure, and very low for aesthetics due to the subjective nature of assessments and variability in reporting. Conclusions: The primary limitations of the evidence included in this review are the observational design of the studies, leading to an inherent risk of bias, inconsistency in reporting methods, and imprecision in outcome measures. Additionally, the subjective nature of aesthetic evaluations and the variability in assessment tools further limit the reliability of the findings. The DBFF technique demonstrates excellent outcomes for mandibular reconstruction, with high flap survival and low implant failure rates, making it a viable option for dental rehabilitation. However, the evidence for aesthetic outcomes is less certain, highlighting the need for more rigorous and standardized research. This review supports the DBFF as a good alternative for mandibular reconstruction with successful dental implant integration, although further studies are needed to enhance the reliability of aesthetic evaluations.

Double-barrel flap, vertical distraction and iliac crest graft are used to reconstruct the vertical height of the fibula. Twenty-four patients with fibula flap were reconstructed comparing these techniques (eight patients in each group) in terms of height of bone, bone resorption, implant success rate and the effects of radiotherapy. The increase in vertical bone with vertical distraction, double-barrel flap and iliac crest was 12.5 ± 0.78 mm, 18.5 ± 0.5 mm, and 17.75 ± 0.6 mm, (p < 0.001). The perimplant bone resorption was 2.31 ± 0.12 mm, 1.23 ± 0.09 mm and 1.43 ± 0.042 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. There were significant differences in vertical bone reconstruction and bone resorption between double-barrel flap and vertical distraction and between iliac crest and vertical distraction (p < 0.001). The study did not show significant differences in implant failure (p = 0.346). Radiotherapy did not affect vertical bone reconstruction (p = 0.125) or bone resorption (p = 0.237) but it showed higher implant failure in radiated patients (p = 0.015). The double-barrel flap and iliac crest graft showed better stability in the height of bone and less bone resorption and higher implant success rates compared with vertical distraction. Radiation therapy did not affect the vertical bone reconstruction but resulted in a higher implant failure.

Background: This preliminary case series aimed to evaluate the clinical and morphometric outcomes of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) surgery in patients with severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) using virtual surgical planning (VSP), patient-specific cutting guides, and customized titanium plates. Primary outcomes included changes in the Apnea–Hypopnea Index (AHI), airway dimensions, surgical accuracy, and quality of life. Methods: In this preliminary case series, six patients with severe OSA underwent MMA surgery planned using three-dimensional VSP, and executed with the aid of CAD-/CAM-generated surgical guides and patient-specific osteosynthesis. Clinical variables included AHI, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and computed tomography-based airway morphometry. Surgical accuracy was assessed by comparing planned and achieved skeletal movements. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Spearman’s correlation. Results: The mean preoperative AHI decreased significantly from 48.8 ± 23.6 to 12.4 ± 10.0 (p = 0.035), and ESS scores improved from 14.5 ± 4.6 to 7.8 ± 2.1 (p = 0.029). Mean airway area increased significantly from 51.8 ± 9.0 mm² to 91.8 ± 26.6 mm² (p = 0.035). A strong but non-significant correlation was observed between airway gain and ESS improvement (p = 0.754, p = 0.084). No patients required CPAP at 6-month follow-up, and all were asymptomatic. The anteroposterior accuracy of skeletal movements was high: 82.6% for the maxilla and 85.8% for the pogonion, with mean absolute errors of 1.25 mm and 1.95 mm, respectively. Vertical accuracy was lower, particularly in the chin region, where error analysis showed greater variability. No statistically significant differences were found between planned and achieved movements in any vector. Conclusions: MMA surgery performed with VSP, cutting guides, and customized titanium plates offers a highly effective, safe, and precise treatment modality for selected OSA patients. This approach leads to a significant reduction in AHI, expansion of the upper airway, and improvement in patient-reported daytime functioning. High accuracy in skeletal repositioning—particularly in anteroposterior vectors—supports the reliability and reproducibility of digitally guided orthognathic surgery. These findings reinforce the role of technologically assisted MMA as a definitive treatment for severe OSA.

The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) is one of the most complex joints in the human anatomy. In advanced degenerative stages, conservative or minimally invasive surgical therapies have failed to restore joint function, and joint replacement with prostheses has been required. Stock prostheses, compared to custom-made prostheses, are much less expensive and require less pre-operative preparation time. Four patients followed for years for temporomandibular dysfunction and previously operated on by arthroscopy or open joint surgery that have been reconstructed with stock TMJ prostheses (STMJP) through virtual surgical planning (VSP) and an STL model with surgical and positioning guides were included. The median follow-up was 15 months; the median number of previous TMJ surgeries was 2. The mean preoperative MIO was 24.6 mm and at longest follow-up was 36.4 mm. The median preoperative TMJ pain score was 8, and the median postoperative TMJ pain was 3. All patients have improved their mandibular function with a clear improvement of their initial situation. In conclusion, we believe that stock TMJ prostheses with virtual surgical planning and surgical guides are a good alternative for TMJ reconstruction at the present time. Nonetheless, prospective and randomized trials are required with long-term follow up to assess their performance and safety.

Background/Objectives: Oral cancer resection often leads to maxillofacial defects and dentition loss, compromising patients’ quality of life. Implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation offers a reliable solution to restore function, though factors such as bone reconstruction, radiotherapy, and timing of implant placement (immediate vs. delayed) may influence outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate long-term implant survival and rehabilitation timelines in oncologic patients, comparing two cohorts (2005–2014 and 2015–2024) to assess the impact of evolving clinical practices. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón (Madrid, Spain), including 304 patients who underwent ablative oral cancer surgery and subsequent implant-based rehabilitation between 2005 and 2024. Data on demographics, oncologic treatment, reconstruction, implant timing, and prosthetic rehabilitation were collected. Outcomes were compared using Kaplan–Meier analysis and appropriate statistical tests between the 2005–2014 (n = 122) and 2015–2024 (n = 182) cohorts. Results: A total of 2341 Ticare Implants^® were placed, supporting 281 prostheses. Implant placement during primary surgery increased from 41% to 71% (p < 0.001). The median time from surgery to prosthesis significantly decreased from 24 to 15 months (p < 0.001). Five-year implant survival was 95% in the early cohort versus 97% in the later cohort. Implant survival was comparable between irradiated and non-irradiated patients (~94–96%). Fixed prostheses became more frequent (92% vs. 79%, p = 0.002). Conclusions: Implant-supported rehabilitation in oncologic patients is highly feasible and durable, with improved timelines and functional outcomes associated with early implant placement and modern digital planning strategies.