Comparative analysis of surgical and prosthetic rehabilitation in maxillectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis on quality-of-life scores and objective speech and masticatory measurements

Abstract

Statement of problem

Patients with oro-antral communication, whether from trauma, disease, or congenital anomalies, have options for surgical reconstruction or prosthetic obturation, but guiding interdisciplinary protocols are lacking.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare surgical reconstruction and prosthetic obturation, identifying correlations with baseline characteristics to determine the most effective approach for specific patients.

Material and methods

A systematic search was conducted in 4 databases. Searching, screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed by 2 reviewers. Eligible studies focused on patients with palatomaxillary defects from cancer-related maxilla surgeries. Traumatic or congenital defects were excluded. The study compared prosthetic restoration (either with surgical or definitive obturators) to surgical reconstruction using flaps or grafts. Patients with surgical restoration after tooth extraction were excluded. Both subjective and objective outcomes were used for comparison.

Results

Thirteen articles were included in the qualitative synthesis and 9 in the meta-analysis. Patient scores on quality-of-life questionnaires, objective speech, and masticatory ability evaluations were compared. The number of patients who underwent surgical reconstruction was 206, whereas 260 patients received prosthetic obturators. Results showed no significant differences. In the “activity” domain of the University of Washington QoL questionnaire, however, the 1.92 (0.45, 3.40) score difference was not clinically relevant. However, the heterogeneity of trials, the transient nature of subjective evaluations, the low number of participants, and major confounding biases did not allow a solid conclusion to be drawn.

Conclusions

The growing number of maxillectomy patients demands firm evidence on which rehabilitation to choose and when it should be done. The result suggests that obturator devices and surgical reconstruction have similar effects on quality of life and health outcomes. A multicentric registry in which patient strata could be analyzed separately by age, adjuvant therapies, defect sizes, and remaining dentition is advocated.