• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.329-336
• /
• 2009

In the case of congenital malformation, acquired trauma, or maxillectomy by neoplasm, the defect in maxilla is combined with nasal cavity, maxillary sinus and oral cavity. This results in abnormal function in pronunciation, mastication, and swallowing. In this situation, the purposes of prosthodontics are also applied. The purposes of obturator for acquired maxillary deficiency patients are restoring pronunciation, mastication, and swallowing, and make patients comfortable and esthetic satisfaction. Reducing weight of the obturator makes edentulous ridge heathy and functional. It also improves patients' comfort. Hollow obturator also reduces unnecessary stress because improves physiologic function, as it weights less than 6.55-33.06% compare to usual one. This case presents the double-processing method for maxillary obturator in the patient treated hemi-maxillectomy due to malignancy neoplasm. We report this case because the patient acquired functional and esthetic satisfaction from double-processing obturator.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.343-350
• /
• 2023

Background: Our purpose was to evaluate a custom reverse total shoulder arthroplasty glenoid baseplate for severe glenoid deficiency, emphasizing the challenges with this approach, including short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications. Methods: This was a single-institution, retrospective series of 29 patients between January 2017 and December 2022 for whom a custom glenoid component was created for extensive glenoid bone loss. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at intervals for up to 5 years. All received preoperative physical examinations, plain radiographs, and computed tomography (CT). Intra- and postoperative complications are reported. Results: Of 29 patients, delays resulted in only undergoing surgery, and in three of those, the implant did not match the glenoid. For those three, the time from CT scan to implantation averaged 7.6 months (range, 6.1-10.7 months), compared with 5.5 months (range, 2-8.6 months) for those whose implants fit. In patients with at least 2-year follow-up (n=9), no failures occurred. Significant improvements were observed in all patient-reported outcome measures in those nine patients (American Shoulder and Elbow Score, P<0.01; Simple Shoulder Test, P=0.02; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, P<0.01; Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index, P<0.01). Range of motion improved for forward flexion and abduction (P=0.03 for both) and internal rotation up the back (P=0.02). Pain and satisfaction also improved (P<0.01 for both). Conclusions: Prolonged time (>6 months) from CT scan to device implantation resulted in bone loss that rendered the implants unusable. Satisfactory short-term radiographic and clinical follow-up can be achieved with a well-fitting device. Level of evidence: III.