Dr. Manju V. currently serves as Professor at the Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, School of Dentistry, Kochi and Consultant Maxillofacial Prosthodontist at Department of Head & Neck Surgery, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences. Dr. Manju has undergone additional training in Maxillofacial Prosthodontics. She joined the Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology at Amrita in 2004.
Year of Publication | Title |
---|---|
2018 |
B. A. S., Manju V., and K., G. V., “Effect of chemical disinfectants and accelerated aging on maxillofacial silicone elastomers: An In vitro Study”, Indian Journal of Dental Research , vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 67-73, 2018.[Abstract] CONTEXT: AIMS: SETTINGS AND DESIGN: SUBJECTS AND METHODS: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: : RESULTS: CONCLUSIONS: |
2017 |
R. Sreeraj, Krishnan, V., Manju V., and Thankappan, K., “Comparison of Masticatory and Swallowing Functional Outcomes in Surgically and Prosthetically Rehabilitated Maxillectomy Patients.”, The International Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 573–576, 2017.[Abstract] PURPOSE: MATERIALS AND METHODS: RESULTS: CONCLUSION: |
2016 |
A. S. Babu, Manju V., Nair, V. P., and Thomas, T., “Prosthetic rehabilitation of surgically treated orbital defects - Evisceration, enucleation, and exenteration: A case series”, Journal of Indian Prosthodontist Society, vol. 16, pp. 216-220, 2016.[Abstract] The rehabilitation of a patient who has suffered the psychological trauma due to loss of an eye requires a prosthesis that will provide the optimum cosmetic and functional result. The mode of rehabilitation varies based on the type of defect and surgical approach being adopted. A case series of prosthetic rehabilitation of three types of orbital defects - evisceration, enucleation and exenteration have been reported in this article. The clinical relevance of surgical approaches highlights the preservation of remaining anatomic structures creating a negative space or concavity to aid in future prosthetic rehabilitation. A multidisciplinary management and team approach is essential in providing esthetics and to regain the confidence. Follow-up care for the patient is mandatory. © 2016 The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. More »» |
2015 |
B. Halima Shamaz, Anitha, A., Manju V., Kuttappan, S., Shantikumar V Nair, and Dr. Manitha B. Nair, “Relevance of fiber integrated gelatin-nanohydroxyapatite composite scaffold for bone tissue regeneration”, Nanotechnology, vol. 26, no. 40, p. 405101, 2015.[Abstract] Porous nanohydroxyapatite (nanoHA) is a promising bone substitute, but it is brittle, which limits its utility for load bearing applications. To address this issue, herein, biodegradable electrospun microfibrous sheets of poly(L-lactic acid)-(PLLA)–polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) were incorporated into a gelatin–nanoHA matrix which was investigated for its mechanical properties, the physical integration of the fibers with the matrix, cell infiltration, osteogenic differentiation and bone regeneration. The inclusion of sacrificial fibers like PVA along with PLLA and leaching resulted in improved cellular infiltration towards the center of the scaffold. Furthermore, the treatment of PLLA fibers with 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide enhanced their hydrophilicity, ensuring firm anchorage between the fibers and the gelatin–HA matrix. The incorporation of PLLA microfibers within the gelatin–nanoHA matrix reduced the brittleness of the scaffolds, the effect being proportional to the number of layers of fibrous sheets in the matrix. The proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of human adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells was augmented on the fibrous scaffolds in comparison to those scaffolds devoid of fibers. Finally, the scaffold could promote cell infiltration, together with bone regeneration, upon implantation in a rabbit femoral cortical defect within 4 weeks. The bone regeneration potential was significantly higher when compared to commercially available HA (Surgiwear™). Thus, this biomimetic, porous, 3D composite scaffold could be offered as a promising candidate for bone regeneration in orthopedics. More »» |
2014 |
J. S.T., K., T., Mathew, J., Manju V., Sharma, M., and Iyer, S., “Defect components and reconstructive options in composite orbitomaxillary defects with orbital exenteration”, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, vol. 72, pp. 1869.e1-1869.e9, 2014.[Abstract] Purpose The conventional way of reconstructing an orbital exenteration defect associated with a maxillectomy is to cover it with a soft tissue free flap and camouflage it with a spectacle-mounted orbital prosthesis. Also, there are some reports on the use of bone flaps. The objective of this study was to review the reconstructive options for a defect resulting after orbital exenteration and maxillectomy. Materials and Methods This study concerns a retrospective case series of 20 patients. Electronic medical records, including clinical details, operative notes, and follow-up data, were analyzed. Defects were analyzed for their reconstructive components. The reconstructive methods used were studied by the types of flap used, bony versus soft tissue types of reconstruction, and the prosthetic method used to rehabilitate the eye. Outcomes were analyzed for flap success rate. Descriptive methods for data analysis were used. Results Fourteen patients underwent a soft tissue reconstruction alone and 6 underwent bony reconstruction. The free rectus abdominis was the commonest soft tissue flap used. This article presents the outcome of reconstruction in such patients and the utility of individual flaps for their ability to replace different components of the defect. Conclusions Ideal reconstruction should address all individual defect components of facial contour, orbital, palatal, skull base, and skin defects. The free rectus abdominis flap remains the common choice. When a composite socket reconstruction is to be achieved, the innovative free tensor fascia lata flap with the iliac crest bone and internal oblique muscle is an option. © 2014 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. More »» |
2013 |
Manju V. and Sreelal T., “Mandibular Implant-Supported Overdenture: An In Vitro Comparison of Ball, Bar, and Magnetic Attachments”, Journal of Oral Implantology, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 302-307, 2013.[Abstract] In an implant-supported overdenture, the optimal stress distribution on the implants and least denture displacement is desirable. This study compares the load transfer characteristics to the implant and the movement of overdenture among 3 different types of attachments (ball-ring, bar-clip, and magnetic). Stress on the implant surface was measured using the strain-gauge technique and denture displacement by dial gauge. The ball/O-ring produces the optimal stress on the implant body and promotes denture stability. More »» |
2009 |
Manju V., “Prosthetic Rehabilitation of a Facial Defect with Silicone”, Kerala Dental Journal, 2009. |
2009 |
Manju V. and Vinodkrishnan, “Ocular defects Rehabilitation”, Amrita Journal of Medicine, vol. 5, no. 1, 2009. |
2009 |
Anil Mathew, Kepanasseril, A., Gopikrishnan,, and Manju V., “Assessment of the rheological properties of poly methyl methacrylate incorporated with 30% volume of highly drawn linear polyethylene fibres: An invitro study”, Amrita Journal of Medicine, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 27-34, 2009. |
2009 |
Manju V. and Anil Mathew, “Case Report - Prosthetic rehabilitation of facial defect with silicone prosthesis”, Kerala Dental Journal , vol. 32, no. 3, 2009. |