Economic aspects of rehabilitation of patients with maxillofacial defects using epithesis (ectoprostheses)

The purpose of this study was to consider the economic aspects of the rehabilitation of patients with maxillofacial defects carried out on the basis of the Clinic of Professor Nikolaenko, the Medical and Production Center Epitetika, Krasnoyarsk and the Krasnoyarsk Regional Clinical Oncological Dispensary named after. A. I. Kryzhanovsky, with the support of the Krasnoyarsk regional science fund. Maxillofacial defects can be caused by trauma or be congenital, but up to 80% of facial defects are the consequences of neoplasms in the head and neck and their surgical removal. For the rehabilitation therapy of forty-two patients suffering from defects in the maxillofacial region, epitheses of various designs were made. Silicone elastomers were used as a material using CAD/CAM technologies. Epithesis was fixed using special adhesive materials and magnetic attachments. The age of the patients ranged from 11 to 77 years, including 27 men (64,3%) and 15 (35,7%) women. The conducted studies have shown good results in the restoration of maxillofacial defects from an aesthetic and functional point of view. Taking into account the individual approach for each manufactured epithesis, as well as due to the high cost of the materials used (titanium implants, mesostructure, medical silicone, etc.), the cost of one patient's rehabilitation can be more than 1,500 thousand rubles. depending on the type of epithesis and method of fixation. Specialists of the Medical and Production Center Epithetika developed and patented a universal system for fixing the epithesis of domestic production with full import substitution of materials and works. This approach allows to reduce the cost of rehabilitation systems for patients with maxillofacial defects using epitheses by more than 30%. At the same time, the cost does not depend on the exchange rate, Western sanctions and the political situation in the world. The best option is to include a full range of rehabilitation in the list of services provided by the Russian Compulsory Medical Insurance Fund.

1. Kozlov V. A., Matchin A. A. Issues of Rehabilitation for Oral Cavity Cancer // Institute of Dentistry. 2014; 1 (62): 34-37. (In Russ.)

2. Pustovaya I. V., Engibaryan M. A., Svetitskiy P. V. et al. Orthopedic treatment in cancer patients with maxillofacial pathology // South Russian Journal of Cancer. 2021; 2 (2): 22-33. https://doi.org/10.37748/2686-9039-2021-2-2-3 (In Russ.)

3. Tcherezova N. I. Choice of osteofixation of epithesis in total defect of the maxillofacial region // Bulletin of the Medical Institute Reaviz. Rehabilitation, Doctor and Health. 2021; 3 (51): 98-101. https://doi.org/10.20340/vmirvz.2021.3.DENT.4 (In Russ.)

4. Antonova I. N., Kalakutsky N. V., Veselova K. A. et al. Properties of materials for craniofacial prostheses // Institute of Dentistry. 2019; 1 (82): 94-97. (In Russ.)

5. Farook T. H., Jamayet N. B., Abdullah J. Y. et al. A systematic review of computerized tools and digital techniques used to fabricate nasal, auricular, orbital, and ocular prostheses for facial defect rehabilitation // J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 121 (3): 268-277. DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2019.10.003.

6. Unkovskiy A., Spintzyk S., Brom J., et al. Direct 3D printing of silicone facial prostheses: A preliminary experience in digital workflow // J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 120 (2): 303-308. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.11.007.

7. Powell S. K., Cruz R. L. J., Ross M. T. et al. Past, present, and future of softtissue prosthetics: advanced polymers and advanced manufacturing // Adv. Mater. 2020; 32: 2001-2122. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202001122.

8. Arutyunov S. D., Leontiev V. K., Tsimbalistov A. V. et al. Occupational risks in the rehabilitation of patients with acquired defects of the face and jaw (review of literature) // Challenges in Modern Medicine. 2020; 43 (2): 285-303. DOI: 10.18413/2687-0940-2020-43-2-285-303. (In Russ.)

9. Dings J. P. J., Merkx M. A. W., de Clonie Maclennan-Naphausen M. T. P. et al. Maxillofacial prosthetic rehabilitation: A survey on the quality of life // J. Prosthet. Dent. 2018; 120: 780-786. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.032.

10. Wondergem M., Lieben G., Bouman S. et al. Patients’ satisfaction with facial prostheses // British J. Oral Maxillofacial. Surgery. 2016; 54: 394-399. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.09.011.

11. Arutyunov S. D., Polyakov D. I., Muslov S. A. et al. Study of the quality of life of patients using the QL PAER specific questionnaire after prosthetic auricular reconstruction // Clinical Dentistry (Russia). 2021; 1 (97): 160-164. DOI: 10.37988/1811-153X_2021_1_160. (In Russ.)

12. Nikolaenko S. A., Zubarev A. I., Shapiro L. A. et al. Prosthetic rehabilitation of patients with acquired maxillofacial defects with adhesive-fixed epitheses // Clinical Dentistry. 2016; 4 (80): 42-45. (In Russ.)