Extraoral Maxillofacial Prosthetic Materials: Results of the 2020 International Survey.

Abstract

Purpose: To report the results of a 2020 international survey of the most commonly used materials and techniques for the fabrication of extraoral maxillofacial prosthetics, and to assess the use of 3D technology.

Materials and methods: A 43-question survey was administered via Qualtrics to the members of the American Academy of Maxillofacial Prosthetics (AAMP), the International Anaplastology Association (IAA), and the International Society of Maxillofacial Rehabilitation (ISMR). The use of current 3D technology in the fabrication of maxillofacial prostheses as well as barriers to care such as patient cost and insurance coverage were also assessed.

Results: In total, 134 respondents (13%) completed the survey; 96 (73%) reported that they were currently fabricating maxillofacial prostheses and were thus included in the survey. The majority of respondents reported currently using Silastic MDX4-4210 BioMedical Grade Elastomer (DuPont) with either Silastic Medical Adhesive Silicone Type A or Silastic MDX4-4210 crosslinker. Incorporating the use of current CAD/CAM technology was reported by a majority of respondents (58%; 45/77); however, a small cohort (33%, 15/45) reported they were still experimenting how best to use technology. A total of 39 clinicians (49%) reported that facial prosthetics were most often paid for by the patient (fee for service), with the fees ranging from $10 to $5,500 USD.

Conclusions: The results of this survey indicate that current CAD/CAM technology has been adopted and incorporated into the design and fabrication of maxillofacial prostheses. More research is needed to advance CAD/CAM technology as well as the physical and mechanical properties of materials in maxillofacial prosthetics and anaplastology clinical practice. Int J Prosthodont 2023;36:570-580.