Home  -  About us  -  Editorial board  -  Search  -  Ahead of print  -  Current issue  -  Archives  -  Instructions  -  Subscribe  -  Contacts  -  Advertise - Login 
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 164-168

Rehabilitation of auricular defect with implant-retained auricular prosthesis - A case report

1 Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Army Dental Center R&R, Delhi, India
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Army Dental Center R&R, Delhi, India
3 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Army Dental Center R&R, Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Dushyant Chauhan
Department of Prosthodontic and Crown and Bridge, Army Dental Center R&R, Delhi Cantt, Delhi - 110 010
Login to access the Email id

DOI: 10.4103/ams.ams_343_20

Rights and Permissions

Rationale: Maxillofacial defect is of great concern physically, emotionally, and psychologically for a patient. However, it is an even bigger challenge for a team attempting rehabilitation, as a crucial decision has to be made between surgical approach and/or prosthetic rehabilitation. However, if both are combined, it will result in best of esthetics and function with ease of maintainance, resulting in a sucessful rehabilitation. This case report represents a case of auricular defect rehabilitated with a combination of implants and bar-retained silicone prosthesis. Patient Concern: A 38-year-old male patient with right auricular defect reported with the main concern of esthetic rehabilitation of a lost part of the external ear. Diagnosis: With through evaluation and examination, a diagnosis of acquired partial auricular defect of the right side secondary to trauma was established. Treatment: An implant-retained auricular prosthesis was planned for this case. Surgically, three intraoral implants were placed in the mastoid bone, and after healing, bar framework was fabricated and attached. Finally, silicone prosthesis was fabricated and delivered to the patient. Outcome: A successful rehabilitation was carried out in this case using implants and bar attachment for retention of the silicone prosthesis. This prosthesis provided excellent retention and restored the appearance and confidence of the patient. Take-away Lessons: Rehabilitation of the auricular defect can be carried out with surgical approach, which involves multiple surgeries, and still, the results may not be esthetically favorable. Prosthetic rehabilitation is an option, but retention is generally a hindrance. However, implant-retained prosthesis has really paved a way for rehabilitation of the maxillofacial defect esthetically and more reliably. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CT) can be used for planning and evaluation instead of CT, which will save the patient from a lot of radiation exposure. Hence, in the maxillofacial defect, attempts should be made to explore the option of implant-retained prosthesis.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded62    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal