Prosthetic Rehabilitation Options in Post-Ablative Maxillomandibular Microvascular Reconstructions.
Fixed prosthesis
Implant-assisted dentures
Microvascular reconstruction
Prosthetic rehabilitation
Removable prosthesis
Journal
Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery
ISSN: 0972-8279
Titre abrégé: J Maxillofac Oral Surg
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101538309
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
29
01
2023
accepted:
23
02
2023
pmc-release:
01
03
2024
medline:
13
4
2023
entrez:
12
4
2023
pubmed:
13
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Surgery remains the mainstay for managing most neoplasms arising in the head and neck area. Removable or fixed prostheses are commonly used for prosthetic rehabilitation of head and neck defects following surgical resection. Some major challenges in prosthetic rehabilitation after maxillomandibular microvascular reconstruction include excessive prosthetic space, soft tissue bulk, and occlusal disharmony in the remaining dentition. This review focuses on the challenges we have experienced in the real clinical scenario while rehabilitating reconstructed maxillomandibular defects and the effective prosthetic treatment options that could be considered in each situation. Digital revolution has changed all arenas of life, and it has created a significant impact on cancer treatment planning and the delivery of quality treatment to the needy. Creating adequate retention while ensuring stability and support for the prosthesis can be challenging with temporary acrylic and cast partial removable dentures. Endosseous dental implants are considered a stable, reliable, and esthetic option for reconstruction with advantages such as increased chewing efficiency, preservation of the remaining bone height and width, and improved quality of life. The FP3 to RP5 (Misch's classification) are some commonly followed prosthetic rehabilitation options after microvascular reconstruction. The prosthetic design should permit the usage of interdental aids that ensure the longevity of prostheses. Occlusion-driven/prosthetic-driven implant-assisted prostheses are considered a reliable option that ensures stable and functional oral rehabilitation among patients with free fibula flap reconstruction. Multidisciplinary teamwork is mandatory for an optimal outcome that improves patients' quality of life.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37041947
doi: 10.1007/s12663-023-01883-x
pii: 1883
pmc: PMC10082883
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
10-19Informations de copyright
© The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interestNone.
Références
Head Face Med. 2016 Jan 27;12:7
pubmed: 26818457
Int J Oral Implantol. 1991;7(2):17-21
pubmed: 1815697
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998 Jul-Aug;13(4):506-12
pubmed: 9714957
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018 Oct;20(5):852-859
pubmed: 30144257
Curr Oncol. 2022 May 06;29(5):3375-3392
pubmed: 35621664
Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2011 May;23(2):337-45, vii
pubmed: 21492805
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Oct;78(10):1869.e1-1869.e10
pubmed: 32707040
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998 Jan;56(1):38-44
pubmed: 9437980
J Oral Implantol. 2013 Jun;39(3):302-7
pubmed: 22891704
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2022 Jan-Feb;12(1):208-215
pubmed: 35024329
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Sep-Oct;28(5):e221-9
pubmed: 24066339
J Clin Med. 2020 Dec 30;10(1):
pubmed: 33396707
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2022 Jul 1;23(7):695-702
pubmed: 36440515
Laryngoscope. 2019 Dec;129 Suppl 4:S1-S14
pubmed: 31241771
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013 Jun;131(6):1386-1391
pubmed: 23714799
Oral Oncol. 2008 Jun;44(6):571-81
pubmed: 17938001
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Mar;17(1):1-9
pubmed: 22274763
Acta Stomatol Croat. 2016 Sep;50(3):251-257
pubmed: 27847399
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Mar;22(1):39-44
pubmed: 29080960
J Prosthodont. 2013 Aug;22(6):432-8
pubmed: 23388045
Implant Soc. 1991;2(2):11
pubmed: 1883898
Aust Dent J. 2011 Jun;56(2):160-5
pubmed: 21623807
J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Jan 5;:
pubmed: 34998584
Am J Surg. 1992 Dec;164(6):677-81
pubmed: 1463123
J Dent Res. 2013 Dec;92(12 Suppl):119S-30S
pubmed: 24158336
Periodontol 2000. 2003;33:82-9
pubmed: 12950843
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Feb;16(1):80-8
pubmed: 15642034
Implant Dent. 2013 Feb;22(1):31-8
pubmed: 23287974
Br Dent J. 2019 May;226(10):725-737
pubmed: 31127217
Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015 Aug;23(4):261-4
pubmed: 26126124
Indian J Plast Surg. 2014 Jan;47(1):8-19
pubmed: 24987199
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Apr;17(2):220-8
pubmed: 16584419
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Oct;69(10):2663-9
pubmed: 21723018
Int J Med Sci. 2017 Jul 18;14(8):721-728
pubmed: 28824306
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Jul;31(7):615-624
pubmed: 32212393
Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Nov 15;40(1):32
pubmed: 30505827
Int J Prosthodont. 2017 May/Jun;30(3):289-294
pubmed: 28453004
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014 Jul;42(5):e217-23
pubmed: 24269641
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002 Jan-Feb;17(1):17-23
pubmed: 11858570
Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019 Nov;31(4):593-600
pubmed: 31481289
Implant Dent. 2005 Dec;14(4):312-8
pubmed: 16361879
JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2018 Sep 01;20(5):401-408
pubmed: 29801119
Implant Dent. 2006 Jun;15(2):113-21
pubmed: 16766892
Dent Today. 1989 May;8(4):39-44
pubmed: 2597401