Prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous patients after surgical management of oral cancer is difficult and therefore often avoided. However, adequate prosthetic rehabilitation is a pivotal factor for patients to regain oral function. In terms of the masticatory rehabilitation of these patients, the application of a removable prosthesis unsupported by implants may be difficult or even impossible because of the postsurgical anatomical alteration. The benefits of implant-supported prostheses have been recognized for several years. Dental implants may improve denture retention and stability without unnecessary loading of the vulnerable mucosa. Function, comfort, esthetics, and eventually quality of life can be improved. Two different options for oral rehabilitation using dental implants exist. One of these is the fixed prosthesis supported by implants, which does not involve any contact with the oral mucosa, thereby preventing frictional ulcers. The other option is an implant-supported overdenture, which allows improved oral hygiene. Barão et al. reported that patients with implant-supported overdentures exhibited a higher degree of stress on the supporting mucosa than those with fixed implant-supported prostheses. In those with fixed implant-supported prostheses, the prosthesis is completely supported by the implants, with no mucosal contact; therefore, fixed implant-supported prostheses limit the degree of mechanical irritation to the soft tissue.

Based on the clinical and histological findings, our case was considered to be an intermediate-grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma. Because wide local surgical excision is critical in the treatment of this tumor, we performed entire resection of the alveolar ridge, also considering her age and esthetic concerns. Loss of the alveolar ridge led to severe masticatory dysfunction. In the present case, the patient refused further surgical intervention following surgical removal of the gingival carcinoma, and we adopted an implant-supported overdenture because of its relative simplicity, ease of self-maintenance, and affordability. According to the literature, in patients with malignancies involving the lower region of the oral cavity, a minimum of four implants is needed to achieve maximal implant support for the prosthesis and to relieve the vulnerable underlying soft tissues.