Evaluation of Conventional Clasping versus Telescopic Attachment Formaxillary Obturator

Statement of problem The majority of maxillary defects can be rehabilitated with conventional simple obturator prosthesis. However, inadequate retention, stability and support may be associated with the use of an obturator. Telescopic crowns have been used to retain obturator for some time. The use of telescopic crown in a dentate maxillectomy patient can yield significant functional improvement while maintaining the obturator's aesthetic advantages, and increase patient's satisfaction. In this study a clinical evaluation was preformed to compare between those type of obutartor's Subjects and methods Sixteen patients were selected with unilateral maxillectomy in this study. The criteria for inclusion will be the presence of remaining maxillary teeth adequate for placing conventional definitive obturator and no history or planning for radiation therapy. While exclusion criteria are smokers, tumor recurrence, and patients have systemic metabolic diseases. They were divided into two groups according to treatment modality. Group (1) wearing obturator with telescopic attachment. Group (2) wearing obturator with conventional clasping. After delivery of each obturator type, and at 3, 6, 9, 12 months the clinical evaluation was measured in from of pocket depth, gingival index to the Abutment, and patient satisfaction. Results In general there is increase in pocket depth and gingival index of both types of retainer was observed. The pocket depth values recorded were higher in obturator with conventional clasping than that with telescopic crown, While there is no difference occur in gingival index. According to patient satisfaction, patients with the telescopic crown retained obturator were more satisfied than the conventional clasping. Conclusion Under the limitations of this study we can conclude that the obturator retained by telescopic crown successful treatment option for unilateral maxillary cases.