A modified classification for the maxillectomy defect

Abstract

Background At present no widely accepted classification exists for the maxillectomy defect suitable for surgeons and prosthodontists. An acceptable classification that describes the defect and indicates the likely functional and aesthetic outcome is needed. Methods The classification is made on the basis of the assessment of 45 consecutive maxillectomy patients derived prospectively from the database (September 1992) and retrospectively from 1989. Results The classification of the vertical component is as follows: Class 1, maxillectomy without an oro‐antral fistula; Class 2, low maxillectomy (not including orbital floor or contents); Class 3, high maxillectomy (involving orbital contents); and Class 4, radical maxillectomy (includes orbital exenteration); Classes 2 to 4 are qualified by adding the letter a, b, or c. The horizontal or palatal component is classified as follows: a, unilateral alveolar maxillectomy; b, bilateral alveolar maxillectomy; and c, total alveolar maxillary resection. Conclusion This practical classification attempts to relate the likely aesthetic and functional outcomes of a maxillectomy to the method of rehabilitation. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Head Neck 22: 17–26, 2000.

Versatility of Fibula Free Flap in Reconstruction of Facial Defects: A Center Study

“…Further The disadvantages of iliac crest myo-osseous flap are its potentially excessive bulk, limited soft tissue mobility in relationship to the bone and short pedicle length [16,17].…”

Microsurgical Reconstruction of Maxillary Defects

“…Based on a combined experience with 45 maxillectomies, Brown et al developed a classification scheme allowing a very detailed description of 10 possible defects involving the palate; defects of the midface not involving the palate were excluded from the classification. [47] Unfortunately, the status of the orbital floor and zygoma, which play an important role in both the function and cosmesis of the midface, were not specifically addressed and specific recommendations for the reconstruction of each type was not given.…”

“…[47] A "block" of iliac bone was used to restore alveolus, zygomatic prominence, and orbital rim with success. Genden et al Described use of the iliac crest-internal oblique osteomusculocutaneous free flap in six patients, four of whom had type llla defects.…”

Premaksi̇lla İle Tek Tarafli Maksi̇ller Defektli̇ Rezeksi̇yon Obturatörleri̇ni̇n Üç Boyutlu Sonlu Elemanlar Stres Anali̇z Yöntemi̇yle Değerlendi̇ri̇lmesi̇

“…Bu sınıflamalar içerisinde günümüzde en çok kabul edilen Aramany'nin yapmış olduğu sınıflamadır. [7][8][9][10][11][12] Bizimde çalışmamızda kullandığımız model Aramany sınıflamasına göre sınıf IV'dür. Yapılan obturatörlerde en fazla retansiyon ve stabilite eksikliği bu modellerde görülmektedir.…”

“…Yapılan obturatörlerde en fazla retansiyon ve stabilite eksikliği bu modellerde görülmektedir. [7][8][9][10][11][12] Bu çalışmada Aramany IV. Sınıf defektlerde yapılan obturatör protezlerde retansiyon ve stabilite eksikliğini gidermek için kullanılan zigomatik implantın, kemik dokuda oluşturduğu stres dağılımı sonlu elemanlar stres analiz (FEA) metoduyla incelenmiştir.…”