Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2010; 04(01): 071-074
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1697811
Original Article
European Journal of Dentistry

Implant-Retained Auricular Prosthesis: A Case Report

A Nilgun Ozturk
a   Selcuk University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics, Konya, Turkey
,
Aslihan Usumez
b   Gaziantep University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics, Gaziantep, Turkey
,
Zekeriya Tosun
c   Selcuk University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Konya, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 September 2019 (online)

  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Extraoral implant retained prosthesis have been proven to be a predictable treatment option for maxillofacial rehabilitation. This case report describes the clinical and laboratory procedures for fabricating an auricular prosthesis.

In this case report, an auricular prosthesis was fabricated for a patient who lost the left and right external ear in an electrical burn. Extraoral implants and bar-and-clip retention for the proper connection of the auricular prosthesis to implant were used. This prosthesis was acceptable to the patient because of excellent support, retentive abilities and the patient�s appearance. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:71-74)

Key words

Auricular prosthesis - Implant retained prosthesis
 

  • References

  • 1 Reisberg DJ, Habakuk SW. Nasal conformer to restore facial contour. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64: 699-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Beumer J, Curtis TA, Marunick MT. Maxillofacial rehabilitation: Prosthodontic and Surgical Considerations. ed 2. St Louis: 1996; 1996: 404
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Gurbuz A, Kalkan M, Ozturk AN, Eskitascioglu G. Nasal prosthesis rehabilitation: A case report. Quintessence Int 2004; 35: 655-656
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Godoy AJ, Lemon JC, Nakamura SH, King KG. A shade for acrylic facial prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 1992; 68: 120-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wolfaardt JF, Wilkes GH, Parel SM, Tjellstrom A. Craniofacial osseointegration: the Canadian experience. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993; 8: 197-204
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Tolman D, Desjardins R. Extraoral applications of osseointegrated implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1991; 49: 33-45
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Parel S, Tjellstrom A. The United States and Swedish experience with osseointegration and facial prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991; 6: 75-79
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Cheng AC, Morrison D, Cho RS, Archibald D. Vacuumformed matrix as a guide for the fabrication of craniofacial implant tissue bar-retained auricular prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79: 711-714
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schaaf NG, Kielich M. Implant-retained facial prostheses. In McKinstry RE. editor. Fundamentals of facial prosthetics. Arlington: ABI Professional Publications; 1995: 169-179
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Wolfaardt JF, Coss P. An impression and cast construction technique for implant-retained auricular prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 45-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bergstrom K. Prosthetic techniques for orbital defects. Bone anchored applications. In Williams E. editor. Nobelpharma international updates. Goteborg: Nobelpharma; 1993. 2(93.2) 5-8
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Tjellstrom A, Jansson K, Branemark PI. Craniofacial defects. In Worthington P, Branemark PI, Stream C. editor. Advanced osseointegration surgery. Chicago: Quintessence; 1992: 293-312
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Tjellstrom A. Osseointegrated implants for replacement of absent or defective ears. Clin Plast Surg 1990; 17: 355-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wang RR, Andres CJ. Hemifacial microsomia and treatment options for auricular replacement: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 197-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wright RF, Wazen JJ, Asher ES, Evans JH. Multidisciplinary treatment for an implant retained auricular prosthesis rehabilitation. N Y State Dent J 1999; 65: 26-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Rubenstein JE. Attachments used for implant-supported facial prostheses: a survey of United States, Canadian, and Swedish centers. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 73: 262-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lemon JC, Chambers MS. Locking retentive attachment for an implant-retained auricular prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 336-338
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Beumer J, Curtis T, Marunick M. Maxillofacial rehabilitation: prosthodontic and surgical considerations. Tokyo: Ishiyaku EuroAmerica Inc. Int; 1996: 436-453
    Google Scholar
  • 19 McKinstry RE. Fundamentals of facial prosthetics. Arlington: ABI Professional Publications; 1995: 169-179
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Cheng AC, Morrison D, Wee AG, Maxymiw WG, Archibald D. Maxillofacial prosthodontic management of a facial defect complicated by a necrotic frontal bone flap: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 3-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 McCartney JW. Osseointegrated implant-supported and magnetically retained ear prosthesis: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 66: 6-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Chung RWC, Siu ASC, Chu FCS, Chow TW. Magnet-retained auricular prosthesis with an implant-supported composite bar: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 89: 446-449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gilson TD, Asgar K, Peyton FA. The quality of union formed in casting gold to embedded attachment metals. J Prosthet Dent 1965; 15: 464-473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 De Vale V, Faulkner MG, Wolfaardt JF, Rangert B, Tan HK. Mechanical evaluation of craniofacial osseointegration retention systems. Int J Oral Maxillofacial Implants 1995; 10: 491
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Wolfaardt JF, Wilkes GH, Anderson JD. Craniofacial osseointegration: Prosthodontic treatment. In Taylor TD. Clinical maxillofacial prosthetics. Chicago: Quintessence; 2000: 285-287
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Karakoca S, Aydin C, Yilmaz H, Bal BT. Survival rates and periimplant soft tissue evaluation of extraoral implants over a mean follow-up period of three years. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 100: 458-464
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ciocca L, Gentile L, Scotti R. New aesthetic results with auricular prosthesis: two case reports. Minerva Stomatol 2003; 52: 435-440
    PubMedGoogle Scholar