CAD/CAM silicone auricular prosthesis with thermoformed stiffening insert

• Autorzy: Żmudzki J. , Burzyński M. , Chladek G. , Krawczyk C.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: Epitheses (facial prostheses) for large facial tissue defects manufactured from silicones exhibit unsatisfactory rigidity and its stiffening is required, which creates technological problems. Moreover, facial epitheses have to be replaced in a relatively short period of use which creates a significant costs, often impossible to realize. The hypothesis of the study was that with use of additive manufacturing is possible to obtain the reusable form for thermoforming of the stiffening insert of auricular prosthesis and the mould which allows multiple casting of silicone prosthesis with the insert. Design/methodology/approach: Manufacturing of the epithesis consisted of designing and manufacturing. In the first step, the auricular prosthesis and the stiffening insert were designed with use of engineering CAD software. In this first computer step, the split form for vacuum thermoforming of the stiffening insert and the split mould for casting of the silicone ear were designed. In the second step, additive printing was used for manufacturing the split and reusable model for vacuum thermoforming of the stiffening insert and the split form of ear. In the third step, stiffening insert was made of thermoformed polyurethane sheet of 0.1 mm thick (Biolon, Dreve), where dental thermoforming machine (Drufosmart, Dreve) was used. In the fourth step, the stiffening insert was located in the mould and the ear was casting of silicone. Findings: CAD/CAM of epitheses with stiffening insert for large tissues defect/loss was proposed, where in case of re-producing, it required only thermoforming of insert and casting silicone with use of the reusable models. Dental technician, in case of damage or loss of a forms, is not much involved in their creation. Research limitations/implications: Bond strength test between stiffening insert vs. soft silicone and manufacturing tolerance of epitheses have not been investigated. Practical implications: Method of casting in a negative form, despite the more timeconsuming when comparing with epithesis direct-printing, allows introducing a stiffening insert and performing a manual adjustment of margin shape and thickness. Method of negative form allows the use of a commercially available medical silicone without the need for medical tests of a new printed materials.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

additive manufacturing; stiffening polyurethane insert; face epithesis; ear epithesis

PL

produkcja dodatkowa; usztywniająca wkładka poliuretanowa

• Wydawca: International OCSCO World Press
• Czasopismo: Archives of Materials Science and Engineering
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: Vol. 83, nr 1
• Strony: 30--35
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 18 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Żmudzki J.

• Institute of Engineering Materials and Biomaterials, Silesian University of Technology, ul. Konarskiego 18a, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland

autor

Burzyński M.

• Absolvent of Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, ul. Konarskiego 18a, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland

autor

Chladek G.

• Institute of Engineering Materials and Biomaterials, Silesian University of Technology, ul. Konarskiego 18a, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland

autor

Krawczyk C.

• Medical College of Silesian Province, Department of Dental Technicians, ul. 3 Maja 63, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland

Bibliografia

• [1] P. Scolozzi, B. Jaques, Treatment of midfacial defects using prostheses supported by ITI dental implants, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 114 (2004) 1395-1404.
• [2] J.C. Lemon, S. Kiat-amnuay, L. Gettleman, J.W. Martin, M.S. Chambers, Facial prosthetic rehabilitation: preprosthetic surgical techniques and biomaterials, Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery 13 (2005) 255-262.
• [3] M.M. Hatamleh, C. Haylock, J, Watson, D.C. Watts, Maxillofacial prosthetic rehabilitation in the UK: a survey of maxillofacial prosthetists’ and technologists’ attitudes and opinions, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 39 (2010) 1186-1192.
• [4] S.M. Hooper, T. Westcott, P.L. Evans, A.P. Bocca, D.C. Jagger, Implant-supported facial prostheses provided by a maxillofacial unit in a U.K. regional hospital: longevity and patient opinions, Journal of Prosthodontics 14 (2005) 32-38.
• [5] L. Ciocca, R. Mingucci, G. Gassino, R. Scotti, CAD/CAM ear model and virtual construction of the mold, , Journal of Prosthodontics 98 (2007) 339-343.
• [6] L. Ciocca L, R. Scotti, CAD-CAM generated ear cast by means of a laser scanner and rapid prototyping machine, Journal of Prosthodontics 92 (2004) 591-595.
• [7] M. Al Mardini, C. Ercoli, G.N. Grasser, A technique to produce a mirror-image wax pattern of an ear using rapid prototyping technology, Journal of Prosthodontics 94 (2005) 195-198.
• [8] K.F. Thomas, The art of clinical anaplastology. Techniques and materials guide for successful facial and somato prosthetic rehabilitation, 2nd ed. London, 2006.
• [9] H. Kurunmäki, R. Kantola, M.M. Hatamleh, D.C. Watts, P.K. Vallittu, A fiber-reinforced composite prosthesis restoring a lateral midfacial defect: A clinical report, Journal of Prosthodontics 100 (2008) 348-352.
• [10] D.H. Lewis, D.J. Castlebery, An assessment of recent advances in external maxillofacial materials, Journal of Prosthodontics 43 (1980) 426-432.
• [11] M.Y. Abd El-Fattah, R.N.A. Kashef, M.A. El Ebiary, Evaluation of two different reinforcing materials used with silicone auricular prostheses, Tanta Dental Journal 10/2 (2013) 31-38.
• [12] D.M. Hecker, J.P. Wiens, T.R. Cowper, S.E. Eckert, C.A. Gitto, R.F. Jacob, G.K. Mahanna, G.E. Turner, A. Potts, H. Logan, R.L. Wiens, Can we assess quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer? A preliminary report from the American Academy of Maxillofacial Prosthetics, Journal of Prosthodontics 88 (2002) 344-351.
• [13] R.M. Watson, T.J. Coward, G.H. Forman, Results of treatment of 20 patients with implant-retained auricular prostheses, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 10 (1995) 445-449.
• [14] Y. Bi, S.Wu, Y. Zhao, S. Bai, A new method for fabricating orbital prosthesis with a CAD/CAM negative mold, Journal of Prosthodontics 110/5 (2013) 424-8.
• [15] G. Pekkan, S.H. Tuna, F. Oghan, Extraoral prostheses using extraoral implants International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery 40 (2011) 378-383.
• [16] S.M. Parel, A. Tjellstrom, The United States and Swedish experience with osseointegration and facial prostheses, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 6 (1991) 75-79.
• [17] J.F. Wolfaardt, G.H. Wilkes, S.M. Parel, A. Tjellstrom, Craniofacial osseointegration: the Canadian experience, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants 6 (1993) 197-204.
• [18] A. Charpiot, O. Chambres, J.F. Herve, P. Million, A.M. Riedinger, P. Hemar, Osteointegrated craniofacial implants: 49 patients report, Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord) 127 (2006) 217-222.

Uwagi

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (zadania 2017)