ArticleCureus2026
Use of Digital Technology to Fabricate a Metal-Based Maxillofacial Prosthesis for Mandibular Defects.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is difficult to make conventional impressions for maxillofacial prostheses in patients with complicated anatomical structures. In addition, even after fabrication, multiple adjustments are usually needed due to its complex morphology. This article describes a combined conventional and digital workflow for fabricating maxillofacial prostheses. An intraoral scanner was used to obtain three-dimensional (3D) data on the interim prosthesis and oral cavity of the patient with a mandibular defect. The surface data of the interim prosthesis was 3D printed with acrylic to fabricate an occlusal record base. A metal framework was fabricated using a combination of digital methods for design and wax pattern fabrication and conventional methods for metal casting. An acceptable fit and a satisfactory clinical outcome were demonstrated by the digitally fabricated new prosthesis. Intraoral scanning and 3D printing are useful alternatives to conventional impression and casting techniques for fabricating prostheses for maxillofacial patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.