Patil Shankargouda, Raj A Thirumal, Sarode Sachin C, Sarode Gargi S, Menon Rohit K, Bhandi Shilpa, Awan Kamran H, Khan Mohammed Ma, Gadbail Amol R, Gondivkar Shailesh, Kakkar Manpreet S, Ahmad Zeeshan H, Ferrari Marco
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Diagnostic Sciences, Division of Oral Pathology, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, Phone: +918122627810, e-mail:
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019 Apr 1;20(4):508-515.
Prosthetic techniques commonly employed for the rehabilitation of edentulous patients might not be adequate in the treatment of patients with microstomia.
The purpose of this paper is to systematically review all the prosthetic techniques that have been used in the oral rehabilitation of patients with microstomia.
Data sources, including PubMed, Google Scholar, SCOPUS and Web of Science, were searched for case reports and case series published through September 2017. Three investigators reviewed and verified the extracted data. Only case reports and case series on prosthetic rehabilitation in microstomia patients published in the English language were considered eligible.
A total of 212 records were identified from the database search. Forty duplicate records were removed. The remaining 172 articles were assessed for eligibility, and 139 articles were removed because they did not satisfy the inclusion criteria. A total of 34 cases (including 32 case reports and 1 case series) were finally included in the qualitative analysis. The review revealed the use of a modified impression technique with flexible and sectional trays to record impressions in patients with microstomia. Modified forms of oral prostheses ranging from sectional, flexible, collapsible and hinged dentures to implant-supported prosthesis were fabricated to overcome the limited mouth opening. The success of the prosthetic technique primarily depended on the extent of the microstomia and the nature of the cause of the microstomia.
Even though the patient acceptance of the prosthetic techniques summarized in the systematic review were high, long-term success rates for each option could not be assessed because of the short follow-up time in most of the included case reports and series.
常用于无牙患者修复的修复技术在治疗小口畸形患者时可能并不适用。
本文旨在系统回顾所有已用于小口畸形患者口腔修复的修复技术。
检索了包括PubMed、谷歌学术、Scopus和科学网在内的数据来源，以查找截至2017年9月发表的病例报告和病例系列。三名研究人员对提取的数据进行了审查和核实。仅纳入以英文发表的关于小口畸形患者修复康复的病例报告和病例系列。
通过数据库检索共识别出212条记录。去除了40条重复记录。对其余172篇文章进行了资格评估，其中139篇因不符合纳入标准而被剔除。最终共有34例（包括32例病例报告和1例病例系列）纳入定性分析。该综述揭示了使用改良印模技术，采用柔性和分段托盘为小口畸形患者记录印模。制作了从分段式、柔性、可折叠和铰链式假牙到种植体支持假体等改良形式的口腔假体，以克服张口受限问题。修复技术的成功主要取决于小口畸形的程度和小口畸形的病因性质。
尽管系统评价中总结的修复技术患者接受度较高，但由于大多数纳入的病例报告和系列随访时间较短，无法评估每种方案的长期成功率。
