Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Maxillofacial Surgery and Diagnostic Sciences, Division of Oral Pathology, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • 2 Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Sri Venkateswara Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, Phone: +918122627810, e-mail: thirumalraj666@gmail.com
  • 3 Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Dr DY Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr DY Patil Vidyapeeth, Sant-Tukaram Nagar, Pimpri, Pune, Maharashtra, India
  • 4 Department of Prosthodontics, Division of Clinical Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 5 Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, Division of Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • 6 College of Dental Medicine, Roseman University of Health Sciences, South Jordan, Utah, United States
  • 7 Department of Prosthodontics, Jazan University, Jazan
  • 8 Department of Dentistry, Indira Gandhi Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
  • 9 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Government Dental College and Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
  • 10 Dental Surgeon, Kakkars Multi-speciality Dentistry, Mohali, Punjab, India
  • 11 Department of Restorative Dentistry. College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • 12 Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Materials, School of Dental Medicine, University of Siena, Italy
J Contemp Dent Pract, 2019 Apr 01;20(4):508-515.
PMID: 31308286

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Prosthetic techniques commonly employed for the rehabilitation of edentulous patients might not be adequate in the treatment of patients with microstomia.

PURPOSE: 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.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: 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.

RESULTS: 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.

CONCLUSION: 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.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.