Intra- and extraoral prostheses retained by zygoma implants following resection of the upper lip and nose

Zygomatic implant-based rehabilitation for patients with maxillary and mid-facial oncology defects: A review

OBJECTIVES

This literature review reports the current evidence for the use of zygomatic implants in head and neck oncology patients for the prosthetic rehabilitation of defects of the mid-face and maxilla.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched using strict search terms. Two independent reviewers reviewed the articles and applied inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Literature search revealed 437 articles, and following application of the inclusion criteria, 32 articles were included for analysis. Overall survival rates of 77%-100% were reported with few complications, although only four centres presented data on 20 or more patients. Primary implant placement at time of resective surgery has been shown to be an effective means of accelerating rehabilitation along with early loading protocols. The role of radiotherapy in implant failure has not been fully elucidated, and it is clear that zygomatic implants can be successfully used in the irradiated patient. Providing support for maxillary obturators was the most common use reported with both splinted and unsplinted implants.

CONCLUSIONS

Zygomatic implants provide remote anchorage for a variety of oral and facial prostheses that contribute to the improved function and quality of life for patients being treated for maxillary and mid-facial tumours.

Advancements in craniofacial prosthesis fabrication: A narrative review of holistic treatment

The treatment of craniofacial anomalies has been challenging as a result of technological shortcomings that could not provide a consistent protocol to perfectly restore patient-specific anatomy. In the past, wax-up and impression-based maneuvers were implemented to achieve this clinical end. However, with the advent of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology, a rapid and cost-effective workflow in prosthetic rehabilitation has taken the place of the outdated procedures. Because the use of implants is so profound in different facets of restorative dentistry, their placement for craniofacial prosthesis retention has also been widely popular and advantageous in a variety of clinical settings. This review aims to effectively describe the well-rounded and interdisciplinary practice of craniofacial prosthesis fabrication and retention by outlining fabrication, osseointegrated implant placement for prosthesis retention, a myriad of clinical examples in the craniofacial complex, and a glimpse of the future of bioengineering principles to restore bioactivity and physiology to the previously defected tissue.

Two-Piece Extraoral Prosthetic Rehabilitation to a Perineural Invasion Lip Cancer

Lip cancers can severely affect a person in terms of function, esthetics, and psychological trauma. After surgical resection, lip defects require special rehabilitation. This clinical report describes a neck prosthesis of a male patient diagnosed with lower lip squamous cell carcinoma with perineural involvement. The neck prosthesis was connected to the mandibular complete denture with cobalt samarium magnets. Both prostheses improved the patient's mastication, deglutition, and esthetics.

Monoscopic photogrammetry to obtain 3D models by a mobile device: a method for making facial prostheses

Purpose

The aim of this study is to present the development of a new technique to obtain 3D models using photogrammetry by a mobile device and free software, as a method for making digital facial impressions of patients with maxillofacial defects for the final purpose of 3D printing of facial prostheses.

Methods

With the use of a mobile device, free software and a photo capture protocol, 2D captures of the anatomy of a patient with a facial defect were transformed into a 3D model. The resultant digital models were evaluated for visual and technical integrity. The technical process and resultant models were described and analyzed for technical and clinical usability.

Results

Generating 3D models to make digital face impressions was possible by the use of photogrammetry with photos taken by a mobile device. The facial anatomy of the patient was reproduced by a *.3dp and a *.stl file with no major irregularities. 3D printing was possible.

Conclusions

An alternative method for capturing facial anatomy is possible using a mobile device for the purpose of obtaining and designing 3D models for facial rehabilitation. Further studies must be realized to compare 3D modeling among different techniques and systems.

Clinical implication

Free software and low cost equipment could be a feasible solution to obtain 3D models for making digital face impressions for maxillofacial prostheses, improving access for clinical centers that do not have high cost technology considered as a prior acquisition.