Three-Dimensional Printed Nasal Prostheses After Oncologic Rhinectomies: Workflow and Patients' Satisfaction.

Details

Ressource 1Request a copy Sous embargo indéterminé.
State: Public
Version: author
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_54878F8268BC
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Three-Dimensional Printed Nasal Prostheses After Oncologic Rhinectomies: Workflow and Patients' Satisfaction.
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
Author(s)
Salati V., Reinhard A., Broome M.
ISSN
1536-3732 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1049-2275
Publication state
Published
Issued date
15/02/2021
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: aheadofprint
Abstract
Reconstructions after oncologic full-thickness rhinectomies are often deferred from the ablative surgery. Definitive silicone prostheses are usually not used for transitional rehabilitation, and therefore, patients may deal with major facial defects for a long time before reconstruction. The aim was to develop a time- and cost-effective digital workflow to three-dimensional print temporary nasal prostheses and to assess patients' satisfaction. This prospective study enrolled all consecutive patients after full thickness ablative surgery and deferred reconstruction, from May 2018 to October 2019, at a tertiary care academic institution. With a dedicated software, the pre- and postoperative scans were three-dimensional processed to create the prosthesis and they were directly printed in elastic transparent resin. A cross-sectional survey was conducted 4 months after the rehabilitation to assess patients' satisfaction regarding comfort, aesthetics, and security of the retaining system. Seven patients were enrolled and they were all rehabilitated using this workflow. Mean time of design was 2h48 (SD 40 minutes), and mean printing time was 5h18 (SD 1 hour). Mean cost of production was 753 U.S. Dollars (SD 144 U.S. Dollars). Median scores of the visual analog scales were 8 out of 10 for each topic with interquartile range of 4 to 7 for aesthetics, 7 to 9 for comfort, and 7 to 10 for security of the retaining system. It has shown its feasibility in terms of costs and time of production. Patients were satisfied and it can be considered as a mean to help patients to deal with treatment sequelaes before definitive reconstruction.
Pubmed
Create date
04/05/2021 9:02
Last modification date
14/05/2021 6:33
Usage data