Fabrication of a bicomponent hybrid orbital prosthesis

Jain, Radhika; Verma, Mahesh; Gupta, Rekha; Gill, Shubhra; Ghosh, Modhupa

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.04.006

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The details on the sites of the defect and types of prosthetic treatment provided are summarized in Table 1. A total of 30 articles [13,14,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]15,[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] on prosthetic rehabilitation in the orofacial region after surgical treatment of mucormycosis published during the 12-year study period were reviewed. Of the 30 articles, 19 reported mucormycosis in diabetic patients, 2 described mucormycosis specifically as a post-COVID 19 complication, and 25 were reports from India.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For rehabilitation of orbital defects caused by mucormycosis, a direct contact of adhesive-retained silicone prosthesis is not recommended because of the risk of accelerated deterioration of the prosthesis and to minimize the risk of recurrence of infection [26,33]. Although the placement of implants in the orbit has been documented, there is an increased risk of failure due to soft tissue infections, decreased vascular perfusion, poor remodeling capacity of the bone-implant surface, and lack of stabilizing bone volume in proximity to the frontal sinus [50][51][52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The rising challenge of mucormycosis for maxillofacial prosthodontists in the Covid-19 pandemic: A literature review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mucormycosis is a deep invasive mycotic infection caused byMucorales fungi and typically affects people with a weakened immune system [1]. The most common conditions that predispose patients to mucormycosis are diabetes mellitus with or without ketoacidosis, hematological or other malignancies, transplantation, iron overload, corticosteroid use, trauma, prolonged neutropenia, and malnutrition [2]. The mode of contamination is the inhalation of fungal spores [3]. The infection can spread to the orbital and intracranial structures either by direct invasion or through the blood vessels. Oral mucormycosis usually affects the paranasal sinuses or nasal area, and severe infection of the paranasal sinuses can lead to palatal necrosis and/or ulceration [4]. Warning signs include cranial nerve palsy, sinus pain, proptosis, diplopia, periorbital edema, orbital apex syndrome, and palatine ulceration. Any of these symptoms should prompt additional testing, such as blood tests, imaging, exploratory ocular and/ or sinus surgery, diagnostic endoscopy, and the start of antifungal therapy [5].Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for mucormycosis [6]. Even patients who have a well-controlled diabetes with no underlying immunosuppressant risk factors are still at risk for mucormycosis infection [7]. Traditionally considered rare, this invasive fungal infection is beginning to become a concern in the COVID-19 pandemic era and with the increasing prevalence of diabetes globally [3]. Medical professionals are also facing additional challenges in the early diagnosis and treatment of this invasive fungal infection during the current COVID-19 pandemic.Among the medical professionals involved in managing patients with mucormycosis, maxillofacial prosthodontists are responsible for prosthetic restoration of lost oral and maxillofacial structures, helping patients to socialize and have an acceptable quality of life after surgical treatment. The purpose of this review is to raise awareness about the expected increase in mucormycosis cases, the associated morbidities, and the role played by maxillofacial prosthodontists in rehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The rising challenge of mucormycosis for maxillofacial prosthodontists in the Covid-19 pandemic: A literature review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[88,212,214,215] Another widely used FDM material for producing prosthetics molds is poly(lactic acid) (PLA) which is a popular polymer with the monomer made from fermented plant starch and is available as a low-cost filament roll. [213,216] Many proprietary rigid materials are also available from commercial 3D printer manufacturers, with polypropylene-like materials, ABS-like materials, nylon materials, and proprietary blends. [52,217] These are suitable for a wide range of 3D printing platforms and are available as powders (for SLS and binder jetting) and resins (for SLA and material jetting).…”

Section: D Printable Rigid Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[201,218] For example, polymer jetting rigid materials have recently been used to produce 3D models of the prosthesis to augment the traditional wax modeling and prosthesis fabrication process. [28,216,219] This allows digital design of the prosthesis using CAD software based on 3D patient data to improve the accuracy of the prosthetic. Another polymer, Polyamide (Nylon), has recently been used as the rigid 3D printing material to fabricate a two piece negative mold for an orbital prosthesis [220] and a special biocompatible 3D printable PMMA resin was 3D printed using a material jetting approach to directly print personalized ocular prosthetics which were subsequently hand painted.…”

Section: D Printable Rigid Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Past, Present, and Future of Soft‐Tissue Prosthetics: Advanced Polymers and Advanced Manufacturing

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

past 30 years, [12,13] it is only the last decade that has seen its rapid development as part of the fourth industrial revolution. [14] This change in practice is evidenced by the significant fraction of recent literature describing advances in 3D printed prostheses, including technological advances [4,15-18] and clinical reports. [19,20] Further innovations involving collaborations between clinicians, academics, and industry, promise even greater capabilities. The future will see 3D printers that can mix materials as desired during fabrication [21] and those that can 3D print organic semiconductors and piezoelectric polymers for sensing and bionics [22-24] (Figure 1). This report is focused on polymers for soft tissue, external, personalized, prosthetics with clinical applications for the ear, [25] nose, [26] eye, [27] face, [28] breast, [29] and hand. [30] The characteristics of both traditional and 3D printable polymeric materials, as well as current advanced manufacturing technologies and those in development, are also reviewed. The earliest evidence of prosthetics dates back to ≈2300 BC, where Egyptian mummies have been discovered with eye, nose, and genital reconstructions fashioned from plaster packed with mud, sand, linen, butter, or soda (Figure 1). [31] Wood, cloth, natural waxes, resins, and metals were later used as the material of choice for rudimentary prostheses. [32] Prostheses remained relatively unchanged for thousands of years until the 16th century, where prosthetic noses and eyes were made from parchment, wax, wood, hard rubber, gold, silver, and copper. [33] Metals continued as a fundamental material throughout the 19th century, largely due to their ability to be shaped and molded as needed. [34,35] One of the first polymers to be used in prosthetics, poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), was developed in response to the glass shortages in the World Wars of the 20th Century. [36] This polymer went on to become the most common prosthetic material of the time, and still finds use today in artificial eyes [33] and prosthetic substructures. [37] Further innovations in the 20th century produced many new polymers, such as vinyls, copolymers, plastisols, and one of the most significant materials in prosthetics, silicone. [38] Discovered in the early 1900s by Fredrick Kipping, silicone was first used in prosthetics by George W Barnhart in 1960. [39] This versatile polymer remains a primary prosthetic material today due to its soft tissue-like properties, ease of manipulation, chemical inertness, durability, and excellent biocompatibility. [40,41] The search for alternative materials Millions of people worldwide experience disfigurement due to cancers, congenital defects, or trauma, leading to significant psychological, social, and economic disadvantage. Prosthetics aim to reduce their suffering by restoring aesthetics and function using synthetic materials that mimic the characteristics of native tissue. In the 1900s, natural materials used for thousands of years in prosthetics were replaced by syntheti...

show abstract

“…Various materials including silicone elastomers, acrylic resins, copolymers, and polyurethane elastomers are used to fabricate the craniofacial prostheses (5)(6)(7). A major challenge in the fabrication of a maxillofacial prosthesis is the application of an optimal suspension technique for maintaining the prosthesis on the patient's face (8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fabricating A Maxillofacial Prosthesis with A Novel Suspension Technique for A Person with Exenteration: A Case Report

Khaghani

Babaee

Mohajeri

et al. 2021

ircmj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Making a prosthesis is challenging for people who have lost an eye and parts of their cheekbones and nasal tissues. Suspending the prosthesis is a significant problem because of the open nasal cavity and the vast lesion area on the face. Case Presentation: This case report describes a new suspension technique used for a maxillofacial prosthesis on a person who had an exenterated left eye and parts of his maxillary and frontal sinuses had been removed due to infection. Since the sinus and nasal cavities were exposed, we could not use the conventional methods (anatomical, mechanical, chemical, and surgical) for suspending the prosthesis. Therefore, a new prosthetic suspension technique was used to solve this problem. Conclusion: In this clinical report, we used an optimal and effective method to make a prosthesis that can be used in similar cases of eye loss and extensive loss of the face. This new method does not need adhesives and minimizes the donning and doffing time of the prosthesis.

show abstract

Fabrication of a bicomponent hybrid orbital prosthesis

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

The rising challenge of mucormycosis for maxillofacial prosthodontists in the Covid-19 pandemic: A literature review

The rising challenge of mucormycosis for maxillofacial prosthodontists in the Covid-19 pandemic: A literature review

Past, Present, and Future of Soft‐Tissue Prosthetics: Advanced Polymers and Advanced Manufacturing

Fabricating A Maxillofacial Prosthesis with A Novel Suspension Technique for A Person with Exenteration: A Case Report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About