Prosthetic versus surgical rehabilitation in patients with maxillary defect regarding the quality of life: systematic review

Sharaf, M.M.; Ibrahim, Sarah; Eskander, Asharaf; Shaker, Amin Fouad

doi:10.1007/s10006-018-0679-9

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For these reasons, open-space obturator was preferred in the case presented in our study. The biggest problem of open-space obturators is that the polishing process on the inner surfaces of the acrylic part, which is located in the defect zone and which is considered as a pool, cannot be performed completely [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rehabilitation of a patient with palatal defect- A case report

Fadhıl¹,

Mumcu²

2019

J Surg Surgical Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Defects in the jaw and face area are caused by congenital anomalies and some infections. In this study, we present a case of palatal insuffi ciency after maxillectomy, treated with shutter which was applied to ensure the aesthetics, phonation and functional defi ciency of the patient. After epithelialization of the defect of maxillectomy, the patient was informed about the technique. Problems of prosthesis for the patient, retention, stability and insuffi ciency of tissue support are detailed. Further, we present the successful rehabilitation with the hollow bulb obturator.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rehabilitation of a patient with palatal defect- A case report

Fadhıl¹,

Mumcu²

2019

J Surg Surgical Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The final esthetic result must be the best possible. Psychological distress can drive to isolation and depression [30][31][32]; the reconstruction should limit this consequence. The main problem in the surgical treatment of patients affected by osteosarcoma is to ensure a "wide" resection and negative margins.…”

Section: Surgical Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Head and Neck Osteosarcoma—The Ongoing Challenge about Reconstruction and Dental Rehabilitation

Cassoni

Brauner

Pucci

et al. 2020

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Head and Neck osteosarcoma is an uncommon disease. Hitherto, the treatment is surgical resection and survival is influenced by the presence of free margins. However, the dimension of the resection may represent a hurdle for an adequate Quality of Life (QOL). Maxillofacial district is a narrow space where the function, esthetics and patient’s relational skills fit together like the gears of a clock. The functional results depend on the type of reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation that are both important to guarantee a good aesthetic result and finally increase the patient’s self-esteem. This study aims to report our experience about head and neck (HN) osteosarcoma focusing the attention on reconstructive and dental-rehabilitative problems. It is a retrospective study all patients were surgically treated in our department. Subjects with histological diagnosis of HN osteosarcoma, treated between 2005 and 2017 were included. The demographic characteristics, surgical treatment, eventually secondary reconstruction and prosthetic rehabilitation, performed in the same department, have been collected. The QOL was assessed through the EORTC QLQ-H&N35 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Head and Neck 35) questionnaire. Fifteen patients were enrolled, eight received a free flap microsurgical reconstruction. Dental rehabilitation was performed in five cases and a mobile prosthesis was always delivered. Eighteen implants were inserted in fibula bones for three patients; highly porous implants were used.

show abstract

“…Reconstruction of these defects is a major challenge for both surgeons and prosthodontists 1‐3 . Researchers have presented valid arguments in choosing the best reconstruction and rehabilitation method for maxillectomy patients, based on parameters such as quality of life (QoL) and functional outcomes 4‐7 . Implant‐supported obturation represents an alternative for surgical reconstruction of defects where the orbital floor is intact and no substantial loss of soft tissues exists 3,8,9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mastication in maxillectomy patients: A comparison between reconstructed maxillae and implant supported obturators: A cross‐sectional study

Buurman

Speksnijder

Groot

et al. 2020

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to compare masticatory performance and patient reported eating ability of maxillectomy patients with implant‐supported obturators and patients with surgically reconstructed maxillae. Methods This cross‐sectional study was conducted at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada and at Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands. Eleven surgically reconstructed maxillectomy patients have been included at University of Alberta and nine implant‐supported obturator patients at MUMC+. The mixing ability test (MAT) was used to measure masticatory performance. In addition, the oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) was measured with shortened versions of the oral health impact profile (OHIP) questionnaire. Values of the implant‐supported obturator group versus the surgical reconstruction group were compared with independent t‐tests in case of normal distribution, otherwise the Mann‐Whitney U test was applied. Results Patients with reconstructed maxillae and patients with implant‐supported obturator prostheses had similar mean mixing ability indices (18.20 ± 2.38 resp. 18.66 ± 1.37; P = .614). The seven OHRQoL questions also showed no differences in masticatory ability between the two groups. Conclusion With caution, the results of this study seem to confirm earlier results that implant‐supported obturation is a good alternative to surgical reconstruction for all Class II maxillary defects. With both techniques, the masticatory performance is sufficiently restored, with careful planning being highly desirable.

show abstract

Prosthetic versus surgical rehabilitation in patients with maxillary defect regarding the quality of life: systematic review

Cited by 13 publications

References 59 publications

Rehabilitation of a patient with palatal defect- A case report

Rehabilitation of a patient with palatal defect- A case report

Head and Neck Osteosarcoma—The Ongoing Challenge about Reconstruction and Dental Rehabilitation

Mastication in maxillectomy patients: A comparison between reconstructed maxillae and implant supported obturators: A cross‐sectional study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About