It remains a significant challenge in prosthetic rehabilitation for combined hard and soft palate defects on account of two primary reasons. At first, conventional impressions can hardly get an accurate analogue and usually bring about a terrible experience for the patients. Secondly, conventional hard denture base resins used in obturator prostheses exhibit limitations in marginal sealing, undercut retention, and elastic buffering when in contact with the soft palate. This article presents a case where combined hard and soft palate defects were successfully and rapidly reconstructed by using digital intraoral impression technology and denture soft reline material.
WangCHHuangIYDuJK, et al.Reconstruction of the soft palate in oral cancer to repair an operative defect with speech aid prosthesis: A case report. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2007;23(10):536-540. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1607-551X(08)70013-5
2.
TunaSHPekkanGGumusHO, et al. Prosthetic rehabilitation of velopharyngeal insufficiency: pharyngeal obturator prostheses with different retention mechanisms. Eur J Dent. 2010;4(1):81-87. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0970-2199(12)62002-5
KurahashiKMatsudaTGotoT, et al. Duplication of complete dentures using general-purpose handheld optical scanner and 3-dimensional printer: introduction and clinical considerations. J Prosthodont Res. 2017;61(1):81-86. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.06.002
5.
OhkuboCParkEJKimTH, et al. Digital relief of the mental foramen for a CAD/CAM-fabricated mandibular denture. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(2):189-192. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.jopr.12476
6.
MichelinakisGPavlakisMIgoumenakisD. Rehabilitation of a maxillectomy patient using intraoral scanning impression technology and a computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing fabricated obturator prosthesis: a clinical report. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018;18(3):282-287. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/jips.jips_14_18
7.
BrucoliMBoffanoPPezzanaA, et al. The use of optical scanner for the fabrication of maxillary obturator prostheses. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;24(2):157-161. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10006-020-00836-9
8.
YeHQMaQJHouYZ, et al. Generation and evaluation of 3D digital casts of maxillary defects based on multisource data registration: a pilot clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(6):790-795. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.01.014
9.
AliIEEnomotoKSumitaY, et al. Combined digital-conventional workflow to fabricate a definitive obturator from an interim obturator for a patient with an anterior maxillectomy defect. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;S0022-3913(23):00285-8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.04.028
10.
TakaichiAFuekiKMurakamiN, et al.A systematic review of digital removable partial dentures. Part II: CAD/CAM framework, artificial teeth, and denture base. J Prosthodont Res. 2022;66(1):53-67. doi:https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00117
11.
Carneiro PereiraALBezerra de MedeirosAKde Sousa SantosK, et al. Accuracy of CAD-CAM systems for removable partial denture framework fabrication: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Feb;125(2):241-248. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.01.003
12.
YeHQLiXWangGB, et al.A novel computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture method for one-piece removable partial denture and evaluation of fit. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(2):149-151. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5508
13.
TasopoulosTChatziemmanouilDKouveliotisG, et al. PEEK Maxillary obturator prosthesis fabrication using intraoral scanning, 3D printing, and CAD/CAM. Int J Prosthodont. 2020;33(3):333-340. doi:https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.6575
14.
DingLChenXZhangJQ, et al. Digital fabrication of a maxillary obturator prosthesis by using a 3-dimensionally-printed polyetheretherketone framework. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129(1):230-233. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.002
15.
PallaESKaraoglaniENakaO, et al. Soft denture liners’ effect on the masticatory function in patients wearing complete dentures: a systematic review. J Dent. 2015;43(12):1403-1410. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.09.005
16.
BuenoMGSousaEJBHottaJ, et al. Surface properties of temporary soft liners modified by minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungals. Braz Dent J. 2017;28(2):158-164. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201701266
17.
LandayanJIManalotoACLeeJY, et al. Effect of aging on tear strength and cytotoxicity of soft denture lining materials; in vitro. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(2):115-120. doi:https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.2.115
KrishnamurthySHallikerimathRB. An in-vitro evaluation of retention, colonization and penetration of commonly used denture lining materials by Candida albicans. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(10):ZC84-ZC88. doi:https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/20892.8665
20.
IwasakiNYamakiCTakahashiH, et al. Effect of long-time immersion of soft denture liners in water on viscoelastic properties. Dent Mater J. 2017;36(5):584-589. doi:https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2016-320
21.
Nowakowska-ToporowskaAMaleckaKRaszewskiZ, et al. Changes in hardness of addition-polymerizing silicone-resilient denture liners after storage in artificial saliva. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(2):317-321. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.002
