I am sorry to have stated this in such general terms. In the normal population, implants have success rates of around 97% regardless of manufacturer. Variables are more dependent on operator than on product. There are some designs that are more desirable than others for various reasons, but that is another issue. In radiated patients, there have only been a few articles published and the success rates (using my own averaging method from several different published articles) is about 74% - which is a significant drop, but the studies do not indicate all the reasons besides radiation treatments that may have affected the outcome. For instance implant failures in general are greater in people that have co factor problems such as diabetes, who are tobacco users, etc., so the data is very rough as many bias factors have not been fully explained in the published data. None of this means that you shouldn't take a shot at having them, since they are a SIGNIFICANT improvement over not having them. What I should have said is that the success rate is lower in radiated patients, and that a factor that increases initial survival is O2 dives. Please note that long term survival of implants in all patient populations is heavily dependant on oral hygiene, something that is complicated to some degree in people with xerostomia. Implants can be lost due to the same reasons that natural dentition can be lost such as periodontal disease, or better stated in this case peri-implant disease. Go for them if it is an option for you. Please note that dental implants are influenced by loading factors that are different than in mandibular bar systems that are used as stabilizers in the initial surgical reconstructions, and they behave differently as a result than the other osteointegrated implant devices.