Publication: Prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects: A review of 110 cases.
9
1
Accepted Date
2014-06-12
Issued Date
2014-09
Resource Type
Language
eng
ISSN
0125-5614 (printed)
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
Faculty of Dentistry Mahidol University
Bibliographic Citation
Thaworanunta S, Shrestha B, Srithavaj T. Prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects: A review of 110 cases. M Dent J. 2014; 34(3): 197-203.
Suggested Citation
Sita Thaworanunta, สิตา ถาวรนันท์, Theerathavaj Srithavaj, ธีรธวัช ศรีธวัช, Shrestha, Binit Prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects: A review of 110 cases.. Thaworanunta S, Shrestha B, Srithavaj T. Prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects: A review of 110 cases. M Dent J. 2014; 34(3): 197-203.. Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/1129
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Prosthetic rehabilitation of orbital defects: A review of 110 cases.
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Objective: Debilitating orbital defects can arise as a part of tumor
management, trauma, and congenital malformations. Due to limitations in
surgical reconstruction, ideal aesthetic results may not be achieved. The
reconstruction of orbital defects mostly comprises of placement of a skin
graft or rotational flaps to close the area. Facial prosthesis is a preferred
alternative, where a more controllable and predictable aesthetic outcome
can be obtained.
Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, a group of 110 patients
who had been rehabilitated with silicone orbital prostheses in the
Maxillofacial Prosthetic Service, Mahidol University between 2000-2011 was
taken into consideration. The most common defect etiologies, surgical and
prosthetic treatment employed, and frequently encountered problems
following rehabilitation were evaluated.
Results: Out of 98 patients eligible for the study, 88 patients were treated
with adhesive retained prostheses and 10 were treated with implant-retained
prostheses. The etiologies that resulted in orbital defects were tumor (86.7%),
fungal infection (7.1%) and trauma (6.1%). Tumors with the highest incidence
were retinoblastoma (29.4%), squamous cell carcinoma (25.9%), adenocystic
carcinoma (11.8%), and others such as basal cell carcinoma, malignant
melanoma, etc. Orbital defects established following removal of the tumor by
exenteration (71.4%), enucleation (24.5%), and trauma (4.1%). Commonly
encountered problems after rehabilitation were discoloration of the prosthesis,
open or torn margins, and acrylic housing dislodgment.
Conclusion: The use of silicone prosthesis can be a safe, predictable and
aesthetic treatment option for rehabilitation of orbital defects. However,
focus on patient awareness, early detection, and intervention should be
emphasized so that the individuals can be spared from these debilitating
conditions.