TY - JOUR
T1 - A pilot study of masticatory function after maxillectomy comparing rehabilitation with an obturator prosthesis and reconstruction with a digitally planned, prefabricated, free, vascularized fibula flap
AU - de Groot, Reilly J
AU - Rieger, Jana M
AU - Rosenberg, Antoine J W P
AU - Merkx, Matthias A W
AU - Speksnijder, Caroline M
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported in part by the Girard de Mielet-van Coehoorn Foundation and the René Vogels Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
PY - 2020/11
Y1 - 2020/11
N2 - STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Oral rehabilitation after maxillectomy can be performed by prosthetic obturation or with a free fibula flap. Successful prosthetic obturation of large maxillectomy defects can be difficult, and masticatory function is at risk in these patients. Surgical reconstruction might provide adequate masticatory function, but the literature is lacking evidence regarding this topic.PURPOSE: The purpose of this pilot clinical study was to assess masticatory functions and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) outcomes in patients after maxillectomy reconstructed by using the Rohner or the Alberta Reconstructive Technique and to compare outcomes with patients rehabilitated with an obturator prosthesis.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mixing ability, maximum occlusal force, maximum mouth opening, and HR-QoL were assessed. Differences between the 2 groups were analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous variables and chi-squared tests for categorical variables.RESULTS: The reconstructed patients (n=11) showed better mixing ability, occlusal force (nonoperated side), and overall mean HR-QoL. The nonreconstructed group (n=13) did not differ from the reconstructed groups in terms of maximum mouth opening, overall mean occlusal force, occlusal force on the operated side, and most HR-QoL questionnaire domains.CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary reconstruction might be beneficial for masticatory performance in patients undergoing maxillectomy. A larger study is justified to support the possible benefit of the reconstruction of maxillary defects regarding mixing ability, occlusal force (nonoperated side), and HR-QoL.
AB - STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Oral rehabilitation after maxillectomy can be performed by prosthetic obturation or with a free fibula flap. Successful prosthetic obturation of large maxillectomy defects can be difficult, and masticatory function is at risk in these patients. Surgical reconstruction might provide adequate masticatory function, but the literature is lacking evidence regarding this topic.PURPOSE: The purpose of this pilot clinical study was to assess masticatory functions and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) outcomes in patients after maxillectomy reconstructed by using the Rohner or the Alberta Reconstructive Technique and to compare outcomes with patients rehabilitated with an obturator prosthesis.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Mixing ability, maximum occlusal force, maximum mouth opening, and HR-QoL were assessed. Differences between the 2 groups were analyzed by using the Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous variables and chi-squared tests for categorical variables.RESULTS: The reconstructed patients (n=11) showed better mixing ability, occlusal force (nonoperated side), and overall mean HR-QoL. The nonreconstructed group (n=13) did not differ from the reconstructed groups in terms of maximum mouth opening, overall mean occlusal force, occlusal force on the operated side, and most HR-QoL questionnaire domains.CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary reconstruction might be beneficial for masticatory performance in patients undergoing maxillectomy. A larger study is justified to support the possible benefit of the reconstruction of maxillary defects regarding mixing ability, occlusal force (nonoperated side), and HR-QoL.
KW - Dental Implants
KW - Fibula
KW - Humans
KW - Maxilla/surgery
KW - Palatal Obturators
KW - Pilot Projects
KW - Quality of Life
KW - Reconstructive Surgical Procedures
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077923771&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.005
DO - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.005
M3 - Article
C2 - 31959395
SN - 0022-3913
VL - 124
SP - 616
EP - 622
JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
IS - 5
ER -