Dear Editor,
I recently came across one of articles published in your journal regarding fabrication of silicone eye prosthesis and maxillary obturator in a patient with history of sino orbital mucormycosis. 1 Authors have mentioned using a custom attachment system which comprised of a brass cylinder inserted in the rear side of an orbital conformer, and housing in the bulb of the obturator. I would like to bring it into your notice that the housings which have been mentioned are the pin and socket of an electricity plug. This technique has been already mentioned in the literature in 2010 for management of a patient having continuous defect and history of Rhinocerebral mucormycosis. 2 Authors of this manuscript have not used the terminology of plug and socket, but the technique presented is same. But the authors have not cited this article and presented it as their innovation. It is difficult to miss this article as it has been published in a PubMed indexed journal and has been cited 23 times. This raises my concern of plagiarism, which needs attention by the editor.
Moreover, authors have reported attachment of silicone orbital prosthesis with the acrylic shell with the help of an acrylic adhesive. This is a misleading information as acrylic and silicone cannot be attached to each other with an acrylic adhesive owing to their different chemical compositions. Although authors have not mentioned which specific silicone they had used, specific primer is required to develop a bond between two materials. An adhesive is used for retaining the prosthesis over face, and not for attaching the acrylic with silicone.
