TY - JOUR
T1 - Changes in quality of life after secondary closure of palatal defects
T2 - Prosthetic obturation versus surgical reconstruction
AU - Matsumoto, Hiroshi
AU - Ota, Tomoyuki
AU - Takeda, Seiko
AU - Mizukawa, Nobuyoshi
AU - Kimata, Yoshihiro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.
PY - 2022/3/1
Y1 - 2022/3/1
N2 - Background: The closure of palatal defects after tumor resection or irradiation is performed with either a prosthesis or autogenous tissue; however, there are no clear criteria regarding selection of the method. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the real-world situation and problems of palatal closure using prostheses, and examined patient opinion on how palatal closure using autogenous tissue improved their postoperative quality of life (QOL). Methods: In 5 patients whose palatal defects resulted from treatment for head and neck cancer and were closed with a prosthesis, the palate was closed secondarily with autogenous tissue; a questionnaire on daily life was administered pre- and post-operatively. Results: Functional improvements in terms of speech and eating were achieved in all and in 4 of 5 cases, respectively. In all cases, the QOL was better for palatal closure with autogenous tissue than with the prosthesis. Conclusions: As postoperative QOL was considered to be better when reconstructing the palate with autogenous tissue than with the prosthesis, we recommend to actively select autogenous tissue for palate reconstruction.
AB - Background: The closure of palatal defects after tumor resection or irradiation is performed with either a prosthesis or autogenous tissue; however, there are no clear criteria regarding selection of the method. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the real-world situation and problems of palatal closure using prostheses, and examined patient opinion on how palatal closure using autogenous tissue improved their postoperative quality of life (QOL). Methods: In 5 patients whose palatal defects resulted from treatment for head and neck cancer and were closed with a prosthesis, the palate was closed secondarily with autogenous tissue; a questionnaire on daily life was administered pre- and post-operatively. Results: Functional improvements in terms of speech and eating were achieved in all and in 4 of 5 cases, respectively. In all cases, the QOL was better for palatal closure with autogenous tissue than with the prosthesis. Conclusions: As postoperative QOL was considered to be better when reconstructing the palate with autogenous tissue than with the prosthesis, we recommend to actively select autogenous tissue for palate reconstruction.
KW - Function
KW - Palatal defect
KW - Prosthetic obturation
KW - Surgical reconstruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126099423&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85126099423&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007969
DO - 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007969
M3 - Article
C2 - 34261961
AN - SCOPUS:85126099423
SN - 1049-2275
VL - 33
SP - 562
EP - 565
JO - Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
JF - Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
IS - 2
ER -