Scholarlink

Background <p>Craniomaxillofacial reconstruction poses significant clinical challenges due to the complexity of the anatomy and the varied causes of defects. Selecting the optimal implant material remains a crucial factor in achieving successful functional and aesthetic outcomes.</p> <p>This study combined a systematic review and a retrospective case series conducted at the Hospital 5, Almaty, Kazakhstan. The sample consisted of 52 patients who underwent craniomaxillofacial reconstruction between 2021 and 2024, receiving either PEEK, titanium, PMMA or silicone implants. Following the surgical procedures, patients were invited to participate in an online survey to evaluate their satisfaction with long-term outcomes.</p> Results <p>PEEK implants demonstrated the complication rate at 22.2%, attributable only to hematoma. Titanium implants exhibited the complication rate—22.7%, with cases of asymmetry and diplopia (4.5%), exposure (9.1%), hematoma (4.5%) and infection with rejection (9.1%). Aesthetic outcome scores, measured by the ANA scale, varied across materials. PEEK implants achieved the highest mean ANA rating with 8.86 (SD = 0.35; 8.25–9.25), showing a significant difference over PMMA, silicone and titanium.</p> Conclusions <p>PEEK implants demonstrated promising clinical and aesthetic outcomes in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction. However, material selection should be personalised, considering defect location, soft tissue coverage to optimise results.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Polyetheretherketone for craniomaxillofacial defects: cases report, evaluation of patients’ satisfaction and a systematic literature review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月24日

查看全文
  • Yuliya Menchisheva,
  • Alvaro Varela Morillas,
  • Nunzianda Frascione

摘要

Background

Craniomaxillofacial reconstruction poses significant clinical challenges due to the complexity of the anatomy and the varied causes of defects. Selecting the optimal implant material remains a crucial factor in achieving successful functional and aesthetic outcomes.

This study combined a systematic review and a retrospective case series conducted at the Hospital 5, Almaty, Kazakhstan. The sample consisted of 52 patients who underwent craniomaxillofacial reconstruction between 2021 and 2024, receiving either PEEK, titanium, PMMA or silicone implants. Following the surgical procedures, patients were invited to participate in an online survey to evaluate their satisfaction with long-term outcomes.

Results

PEEK implants demonstrated the complication rate at 22.2%, attributable only to hematoma. Titanium implants exhibited the complication rate—22.7%, with cases of asymmetry and diplopia (4.5%), exposure (9.1%), hematoma (4.5%) and infection with rejection (9.1%). Aesthetic outcome scores, measured by the ANA scale, varied across materials. PEEK implants achieved the highest mean ANA rating with 8.86 (SD = 0.35; 8.25–9.25), showing a significant difference over PMMA, silicone and titanium.

Conclusions

PEEK implants demonstrated promising clinical and aesthetic outcomes in craniomaxillofacial reconstruction. However, material selection should be personalised, considering defect location, soft tissue coverage to optimise results.