Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 12, 2026
Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
Published on: August 24, 2018
A digital workflow for fabrication of a 3D-printed definitive obturator prosthesis and a preliminary evaluation of
Hanzhi Zhang1, Jiawen Gan1, Chenyuan Zhu1
1Department of Prosthodontics, College of Stomatology, National Cancer for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, PR China.
Purpose:
This study aimed to develop a novel and efficient digital workflow for designing and manufacturing 3D-printed definitive maxillofacial obturator prostheses based on multi-source data fusion and various digital techniques, as well as to evaluate its feasibility through a randomized self-controlled study.
Materials And Methods:
Participants with maxillary defects were recruited for the study. A digital impression was obtained by fusing intraoral scanning data and computed tomography (CT) images. The framework and artificial-teeth-obturator were designed separately using multiple dental design software programs, fabricated through additive manufacturing (AM), and finally assembled precisely into one unit with the help of specially designed auxiliary positioning and connecting structures. For comparison, a conventional prosthesis was also made for each participant. The adaptation of both conventional and digital prostheses was evaluated and compared using the silicone rubber lining method through deviation analysis. Additionally, the chairside impression time for both conventional and digital treatments were recorded and compared.
Results:
The digital workflow for designing and manufacturing maxillofacial prosthesis was successfully realized. The chairside impression time was shortened (p < 0.001). The adaptation of the digital prosthesis, including framework (349.89 ± 121.56 µm), obturator (420.08 ± 166.01 µm), and the whole prosthesis (408.36 ± 118.05 µm), proved suitable for clinical application. No statistically significant difference was observed between the digital and conventional prostheses.
Conclusion:
The newly established digital workflow for the fabrication of definitive maxillofacial obturator prostheses reduced chairside impression time and the number of appointments, featuring clinically acceptable adaptation. This approach has potential for future applications in the treatment of patients with maxillofacial defects.
