Use of Orbital Conformer to Improve Speech in Patients with Confluent Maxillectomy and Orbital Defects.

The basic objective in prosthetic restoration of confluent maxillary and orbital defects is to achieve a comfortable, cosmetically acceptable prosthesis that restores speech, deglutition, and mastication. It is a challenging task complicated by the size and shape of the defects. The maxillary obturator prosthesis often satisfies the objective of adequate deglutition; however, orbital defects that are not obturated in the medial, septal, or posterior walls allow air to escape, negatively impacting phonation. This article describes a technique to achieve favorable prosthetic rehabilitation in a patient with a maxillectomy and ipsilateral orbital exenteration. The prosthetic components include maxillary obturator, orbital conformer, and orbital prosthesis connected using rigid magnetic attachments.

Microtensile bond strength of different acrylic teeth to high-impact denture base resins.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effect of denture base acrylic, denture tooth composition, and ridge-lap surface treatment on the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) of three commercially available denture teeth and two injection denture processing systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen experimental groups were formed (n = 3), according to denture tooth surface treatment (no treatment or surface treatment recommended by the manufacturer), denture base processing technique and acrylic (SR-Ivocap-Ivocap Plus or Success-Lucitone 199), and tooth type-composition at bonding interface (BlueLine DCL-PMMA, Portrait IPN-PMMA, Phonares II-PMMA, Phonares II-NHC). Rectangular bar specimens with a 1 mm(2) cross sectional area were fabricated and subsequently thermocycled at 10,000 cycles between 5°C and 55°C with a 15-second dwell time. Select specimens underwent µTBS testing in a universal testing machine with a 1 kN load cell at 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed. Data were analyzed statistically by two and three-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Mean µTBS ranged between 56.2 ± 5.6 and 60.8 ± 5.0 N/mm(2) for the Ivocap Plus specimens and 13.3 ± 5.12 to 60.1 ± 6.0 N/mm(2) for the Lucitone 199 specimens. Among the Ivocap specimens, BlueLine DCL and Phonares II NHC had significantly higher µTBS than Portrait IPN to Ivocap Plus acrylic. There were no statistically significant differences among Blueline, Phonares II PMMA, and Phonares II NHC, or between Phonares II PMMA and Portrait IPN. Within the Luctione 199 specimens, there was a significantly higher µTBS for BlueLine DCL and Phonares II NHC denture teeth with the manufacturer-recommended surface treatment when compared to control surface. BlueLine, Portrait, and Phonares II PMMA groups achieved significantly higher mean µTBS than the Phonares II NHC group. There were no statistically significant differences among BlueLine, Portrait, and Phonares II PMMA groups. CONCLUSION: When evaluating the µTBS of PMMA and NHC denture teeth to base resins, a stronger bond was achieved using materials produced by the same manufacturer. Within the Luctione 199 specimens, the Phonares II NHC group demonstrated significantly lower bond strength than other specimens, suggesting that gross ridge-lap reduction of NHC denture teeth is not recommended if a base acrylic by a different manufacturer from the tooth is going to be used.