Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May;31(5):405-416.
doi: 10.1111/clr.13577. Epub 2020 Jan 27.

Masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life in edentulous maxillectomy patients: A cross-sectional study to compare implant-supported obturators and conventional obturators

Doke J M Buurman  1   2 , Caroline M Speksnijder  1   3   4   5 , Britt H B T Engelen  1 , Peter Kessler  1   2
Affiliations

Masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life in edentulous maxillectomy patients: A cross-sectional study to compare implant-supported obturators and conventional obturators

Doke J M Buurman et al. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 May.

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare the masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of edentulous maxillectomy patients with and without implant-supported obturator prostheses.

Material and methods: Nineteen edentulous maxillectomy patients with completed prosthetic obturator treatment in the upper jaw participated in this study. In nine patients, the obturator prosthesis was supported by implants in the remaining bone of the midface and/or skull base to improve retention. Masticatory performance was measured objectively by the mixing ability test (MAT) and subjectively by three OHRQoL questionnaires: (a) the Oral Health Impact Profile for EDENTulous people (OHIP-EDENT), (b) the Obturator Function Scale (OFS), and (c) the Dutch Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 (LORQv3-NL). The independent t test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used to test for differences in outcomes of patients with and without implant-retention of their obturator prostheses.

Results: Patients with implant-supported obturator prostheses had significantly better masticatory and oral function, reported fewer chewing difficulties, and had less discomfort during food intake than did patients with a conventional obturator.

Conclusion: Supporting prosthetic obturators after maxillectomy with implants improve oral functioning, chewing, and eating comfort. This treatment modality is a viable technique to improve the functionality of prosthetic rehabilitation in patients who have undergone maxillectomy.

Keywords: dental implant; mastication; maxillary defect; maxillofacial reconstruction; midfacial defect; obturator; quality of life.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A patient presented with a Brown class IId defect (Brown & Shaw, 2010) after avascular necrosis after Le Fort I osteotomy. (a) Bar construction was made on the dental implants to support the obturator, where the space was too large between two implants, magnet abutments were used as alternative retention method. (b) Retentive parts in the obturator prosthesis. (c) Panoramic radiography showed the position of dental implants in remaining bony parts of the midface or skull base
Figure 2
Figure 2
A patient presented with a Brown class IId defect (Brown & Shaw, 2010) after treatment of ameloblastoma. (a) Bar construction was made on the dental implants to support the obturator. (b) Retentive parts in the obturator prosthesis. (c) Frontal view of the obturator. (d) Palatal view of the final prosthesis. (e) Frontal view many years (>8) after implant‐supported obturator delivery. (f) Panoramic radiography showed the position of dental implants in remaining bony parts of the midface or skull base
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Allen, F. , & Locker, D. (2002). A modified short version of the oral health impact profile for assessing health‐related quality of life in edentulous adults. The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 15(5), 446–450. - PubMed
    1. Andrades, P. , Militsakh, O. , Hanasono, M. M. , Rieger, J. , & Rosenthal, E. L. (2011). Current strategies in reconstruction of maxillectomy defects. Archives of Otolaryngology ‐ Head and Neck Surgery, 137(8), 806–812. 10.1001/archoto.2011.132 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boyes‐Varley, J. G. , Howes, D. G. , Davidge‐Pitts, K. D. , Branemark, I. , & McAlpine, J. A. (2007). A protocol for maxillary reconstruction following oncology resection using zygomatic implants. The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 20(5), 521–531. - PubMed
    1. Breeze, J. , Rennie, A. , Morrison, A. , Dawson, D. , Tipper, J. , Rehman, K. , … Pigadas, N. (2016). Health‐related quality of life after maxillectomy: Obturator rehabilitation compared with flap reconstruction. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 54(8), 857–862. 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.05.024 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brown, J. , Schache, A. , & Butterworth, C. (2016). Liverpool opinion on unfavorable results in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction: Lessons learned. Clinics in Plastic Surgery, 43(4), 707–718. 10.1016/j.cps.2016.05.007 - DOI - PubMed

Substances