Citation Information :
Elsherbini AN, Alsharif TK, Elsherbini NN. Dislodging Force Resistance in Hemi-mandibulectomy Patients Rehabilitated with Acrylic Resin and 3D-printed Resin Prostheses. World J Dent 2023; 14 (7):604-607.
Aim: The aim of this crossover study was to compare dislodging resistance in hemi-mandibulectomy patients who had been rehabilitated with prostheses made of conventional acrylic resin (CA), conventional acrylic resin lined with a soft liner (CAS), and three-dimensional (3D)—printed resin.
Materials and methods: Patients were selected with hemi-mandibulectomy class III according to the Cantor and Curtis classification. Patients had a conventional acrylic denture for the upper arch with twin occlusion. For the lower arch, the patient received a conventional acrylic denture, after 3 months it was lined with a soft liner, and after 3 months, it was retrieved and they were given a 3D-printed denture for 3 more months. Resistance to dislodging force was measured using a force gauge at insertion and after 3 months.
Results: The resistance to dislodging forces was highest in the printed denture, followed by lined acrylic followed by the conventional acrylic with mean values of (3.72 ± 0.057) Newton (N), (2.696 ± 0.151) N, and (1.91 ± 0.089) N, respectively.
Conclusion: Three-dimensional (3D)—printed denture bases showed the highest resistance to dislodging forces, followed by the CAS, and finally the CA.
Clinical significance: Aiding patients with hemi-mandibulectomy with the best material to be used in their rehabilitation with dental prostheses.
Lingeshwar D, Appadurai R, Sswedheni U, et al. Prosthodontic management of hemimandibulectomy patients to restore form and function - a case series. World J Clin Cases 2017;5(10):384–389. DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v5.i10.384
Taylor TD. Diagnostic considerations for prosthodontic rehabilitation of the mandibulectomy patient. Clinical Maxillofacial Prosthetics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing. 2000;155–170.
Beumer J, Marunick MT, Curtis TA, et al. Acquired defects of the mandible: etiology, treatment, and rehabilitation. Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, Prosthodontic and Surgical Considerations 1996:184–188.
Marathe AS, Kshirsagar PS. A systematic approach in rehabilitation of hemimandibulectomy: a case report. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16(2):208–212. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.164914
Kataoka T, Akagi Y, Kagawa C, et al. A case of effective oral rehabilitation after mandibular resection. Clin Case Rep 2019;7(11):2143–2148. DOI: 10.1002/ccr3.2459
McCord JF, Grant AA. Identification of complete denture problems: a summary. Br Dent J 2000;189(3):128–134. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4800703
Elsherbini AN, Niedermeier W. Repercussion of conventional complete mandibular denture versus single implant over-denture on retention and biting force. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2021;9; 186–189. DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2021.6769
Agarwal S, Praveen G, Agarwal SK, et al. Twin occlusion: a solution to rehabilitate hemimandibulectomy patient-a case report. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2011;11(4):254–257. DOI: 10.1007/s13191-011-0091-8
Goyal P, Manvi S, Arya S. Prosthodontic management of hemimandibulectomy patient: implants, a better solution. J Dent Implant 2016;6(1):37–40. DOI: 10.4103/0974-6781.190385
Elsherbini AN. Mini-poll coping as an alternative attachment in tooth supported over-denture prosthesis. Egypt Dent J 2019;65(1): 3671–3675. DOI: 10.21608/EDJ.2019.76000
Sheta NM. A comparison of the accuracy of the disto-lingual flange adaptation using two different dentures base materials in lower complete dentures: an in-vitro study. Egypt Dent J 2017;63(3): 2795–2802. DOI: 10.21608/EDJ.2017.76327
Ebrahim E, Abdel-Fattah A, Kabee S. The effect of two different denture base materials on retention of complete denture in severely resorbed lower ridge cases. Al-Azhar Dent J Girls 2016;3(4):287–292. DOI: 10.21608/adjg.2016.5182
Dimitrova M, Corsalini M, Kazakova R, et al. Comparison between conventional PMMA and 3D printed resins for denture bases: a narrative review. J Compos Sci 2022;6(3):87. DOI: 10.3390/jcs6030087
Ciuraj M, Lipowicz A, Graja K, et al. Physiotherapeutic methods of treatment of mandibular distal occlusion and the progress of therapy: a case report. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2022;29:26–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2021.09.026
Behairy NA, Kabeel SM, El-Sadany HF. Evaluation of retention for maxillary complete denture constructed by conventional and 3D printing techniques. Al-Azhar Dent J Girls 2022;9(2):245–250. DOI: 10.21608/ADJG.2022.102156.1423
Grande F, Tesini F, Pozzan MC, et al. Comparison of the accuracy between denture bases produced by subtractive and additive manufacturing methods: a pilot study. Prosthesis 2022;4(2):151–159. DOI: 10.3390/prosthesis4020015
Gad MM, Alshehri SZ, Alhamid SA, et al. Water sorption, solubility, and translucency of 3d-printed denture base resins. Dent J (Basel) 2022;10(3). DOI: 10.3390/dj10030042
Heikal MMA, Nabi NA, Elkerdawy MW. A study comparing patient satisfaction and retention of CAD/CAM milled complete dentures and 3D printed CAD/CAM complete dentures versus conventional complete dentures: a randomized clinical trial. Brazilian Den Sci 2022;25(1). DOI: 10.4322/bds.2022.e2785
Naggar SM, Helal E, Khalil MF, et al. Comparative study of maxillary denture-base retention between CAD/CAM (3D printed) and conventional fabrication techniques: a randomized clinical study. J Arab Soc Med Res 2022;17(1):46–51. DOI: 10.4103/jasmr.jasmr_7_22
Emera RMK, Shady M, Alnajih MA. Comparison of retention and denture base adaptation between conventional and 3D-printed complete dentures. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2022;16(3):179–185. DOI: 10.34172/joddd.2022.030
Faty MA, Sabet ME, Thabet YG. A comparison of denture base retention and adaptation between CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques. Int J Prosthodont 2022. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.7193