Oral quality of life after buccal mucosal graft harvest for substitution urethroplasty. More than a bite?

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to analyze the oral quality of life (QoL) in patients with urethral stricture treated with BMG by using a validated questionnaire (OIDP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, single-arm, observational single-centre study of a cohort of patients scheduled for BMG Urethroplasty was conducted. OIDP assesses the impact of oral conditions on daily activities including an oral QoL question (0-10). The questionnaire was self-administered before, 3 months postoperatively and at the end of the study. Means, pre- and postoperatively, were compared. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the risk factors for a low quality of life (<8) after surgery. RESULTS: We included 41 patients (2013-2017). The mean preoperative oral QoL was 9.33 points (SD1.16). Preoperative mean OIDP dimensional score and global score were 0,5 (SD:0.02) and 0,8%. The most frequently preoperative altered aspect was hygiene. Mean oral QoL, 3 months after surgery, was 8,56 (SD1.89) and OIDP dimensional score and global score were 0,67 (SD0.21) and 1,1%. Mean oral QoL at the end of the study (mean 3,12 years) was 8,50 (SD1.13). OIDP dimensional score and global score were 0,7 (SD 0.16) and 1,1%.The most frequently altered aspect at the end of the study was eating. No statistical (p = 0.07) decrease in oral QoL was found. The increase in OIDP dimensional and global score was also not statistically significant. Neither age nor smoking, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular morbidity, previous OIDP score, width, length of the graft, or surgery success could explain a low oral QoL alter graft harvesting. CONCLUSIONS: BMG harvesting is not free of problems at the donor site. Eating seems to be the most affected aspect after surgery. Nevertheless, those sequelae do not induce a reduction in oral QoL.

Comparative in vitro study of the accuracy of impression techniques for dental implants: Direct technique with an elastomeric impression material versus intraoral scanner.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare a conventional technique (elastomeric impression material - EIM) and a digital technique (scanner digital model - SDM) on a six-analog master model (MM) to determine which was the most exact. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty impressions were taken of a master model (EIM) and twenty scanned impressions (SDM) (True Definition). A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used to measure the distances between adjacent analogues (1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6), intermittently positioned analogues (1-4, 3-6) and the most distal (1-6). Reference values were established from the master model, which were compared with the two impression techniques. The significance level was established as 5% (p<0.05). RESULTS: The precision of each technique was compared with MM. For adjacent analogues (1-2), no significant differences were found between EIM-MM (p=0,146). For intermittently positioned analogues (1-4), SDM did not show significant differences with MM (p=0.255). For the distance between distal analogues (1-6), significant differences were found between both techniques and MM (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical situation with < three implants, EIM is more exact than SDM, but in cases of four implants SDM is more exact. For rehabilitations (> four implants), neither technique can be considered accurate although error falls within the tolerance limits established in the literature (30-150µm).

Oral health-related quality of life of implant-supported overdentures versus conventional complete prostheses: retrospective study of a cohort of edentulous patients

BACKGROUND: This work aims to confirm if implant-supported overdentures are a good treatment option for edentulous patients and offer an improvement in quality of life compared with traditional complete prostheses (dentures). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective clinical descriptive study included three evaluation groups: validation group (n=57); control group of patients with complete removeable prostheses (n=56); study group of patients with implant-supported overdentures retained with the Locator(R) system (n=80). The study also validated the Oral Health Impact Profile-20 questionnaire. Individual protocols were created that included socio-demographic data, the Oral Health Impact Profile-20 (OHIP-20) questionnaire and Oral Satisfaction Scale (OSS). Descriptive and bivariate statistical analysis was carried out applying χ², Pearson, Kruskal-Wallis, and Student t tests, transferring data into SPSS-Windows(R) software from a Microsoft(R) Excel spreadsheet. RESULTS: The OHIP-20 proved to be a valid instrument and provided reliable assessment of health-related quality of life among both the Spanish general population and edentulous patients. The control and study groups proved comparable, showing socio-demographic homogeneity. For patients with overdentures retained by means of the Locator(R) system, these restorations had significantly lower impact on quality of life (19 vs 33), both generally and for each individual questionnaire item, and much higher satisfaction with the state of their oral cavities (8.3 vs 5.3) than patients wearing dentures; both sets of data showed a direct linear relationship, so that as the level of impact on quality of life increased, perceived oral satisfaction worsened. CONCLUSIONS: Patients rehabilitated with implant supported overdentures retained by the Locator(R) system, presented significantly lower levels of impact on their quality of life and significantly higher oral satisfaction than patients with conventional complete prostheses

No disponible