DRJ Dent Res J Dental Research Journal Dental Research Journal 1735-3327 2008-0255 Wolters Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd. India DRJ-15-444 10.4103/1735-3327.245227 Case Report Dental implant-retained auricular prosthesis Yeganeh Farzad Haghighat Abbas Amini-Pozveh Maryam Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Implants Research Center, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IranDepartment of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran Address for correspondence:Maryam Amini-Pozveh, Department of Prosthodontics Dentistry, University of Medical Science, Isfahan, Iran m.amini8412@gmail.com Nov–Dec 2018 15 6 444 446 Copyright: © Dental Research Journal 2018

This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Absence or loss of facial structures causes functional deficits and enormous psychological distress, so rehabilitation is necessary. However, facial prostheses have some difficulties due to mobile underlying tissues and retention. We used dental implant instead of conventional maxillofacial implant and safe on four prosthetic systems which is used in over dentures for retention of auricular prosthesis.

Dental implant maxillofacial prosthesis silicone

Absence or loss of facial structures causes functional deficits and enormous psychological distress, so rehabilitation is necessary.1 Prosthetic rehabilitation can improve function and self-confidence. However, facial prostheses have some difficulties due to mobile underlying tissues and retention.

Different methods have been improved to solve the retention problem. External devices for example glasses are one possibility.2 Skin adhesive is an old method and causes skin reaction in some cases.3 It is difficult to wear and take off adhesive retentive prosthesis during daily actions such as bathing and swimming due to add and remove adhesive materials, repetitively. Osseointegrated implant is another possibility for retention and because of natural sense of prosthesis, ease of use,4 long life time,5 and retention during daily activities is accepted by patient.5,6 Different variations can affect maxillofacial prosthesis successfulness. For example, durability of material used in prosthesis as exposed to water and other chemical component such as soap would be reduced.7 Hence, implant-retained prosthesis with attachment such as bar or magnet which are removable when it is necessary is favorable8,9 and increases patient satisfaction.10

Case Report

A 22-year-old male with left congenital ear loss Figure 1 was referred to the Dental and Maxillofacial Prosthetic Department of Dental School of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. First of all, a surgical stent should be made. The impression was made with irreversible hydrocolloid from both ears. Hence, a wax-up for left ear was made to predict proper position of implants to achieve natural future prosthesis and according to the right ear position and form. The wax-up was flasked to make surgical stent. Computed tomography evaluation of mastoid bone was done in coronal, sagittal, and axial planes. The implants were placed by one-stage surgery.

Primary view.

Figure 1

Two 6 mm length and 4.2 mm width dental implants (SIC max screw implant, Birmannsgasse, Switzerland) were placed in the mastoid bone, and the thickness of soft tissue was reduced Figure 2. For prosthetic procedure, we used Safe On Four system because bar and bridge abutment could be used as a transcutaneous component and was fixed with a screw separately from second part of abutment. Immediately after placement of fixtures, bar and bridge abutment of Safe On four system (SIC Fixation Postsafe on Four, GH 3.0 mm Birmannsgasse, Switzerland) was closed to the fixtures and proper healing screw (SIC Gingiva Shaper Safe on Four, cylindrical) was closed.

Implants placement.

Figure 2

After 3 months impression copings (SIC Transfer Abutment Safe on Four Open Tray Technique, Birmannsgasse, Switzerland) were closed to the abutments and the impression was made at abutment level. The cast was prepared and UCLA abutments (SIC Crown Base Safe on Four, for nonprecious alloy, Birmannsgasse, Switzerland) were closed to the first abutment analogs. Then, a round plastic bar was attached to UCLA abutments. The bar was prepared for casting. After preparation of bar, proper housings and clips were selected. Acrylic resin was placed on housings and bar to make substructure for silicon. A thin layer of wax was formed under acrylic substructure to provide dry environment around skin surface of abutment. A wax-up was made on this substructure. Then, the wax-up was tried on the face and was accepted by the patient. The waxed model was flasked. The primer was rubbed to the acrylic substructure to gain proper bond to silicon. The silicone (Cosmesil Series Material, High Compliance Elastomer, PRINCIPALITY, Newport, Wales, UK) which was colored with intrinsic pigments (Cosmesil Master color, PRINCIPALITY, Newport, Wales, UK) and flakes (Cosmesil FLOCKING, PRINCIPALITY, Newport, Wales, UK) similar to the right normal ear was entered to the flask. After setting completed, extrinsic pigments (Cosmesil Dry Pigment, PRINCIPALITY, Newport, Wales, UK) were used to mimic surrounding tissues colors. The final prosthesis is shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. The case was followed for 18 months.

Final prosthesis skin surface.

Figure 3

Final view.

Figure 4


Extraoral implants in mastoid region have very high success rate near to 100%.11,12 The implant-retained facial prosthesis provides more satisfaction rather than adhesive retained due to ease of use and proper retention in daily activities.9 Implants commonly used in facial prosthesis are extraoral implants which are much more expensive than conventional dental implants. Patients with maxillofacial defects often have financial burdens because these patients often are unemployed as a result of their diseases.1 In this case report, we used dental implant because of financial considerations and better accessibility of dental implant components in surgery and prosthesis procedures. Our patient had properly large deficiency so longer 6 mm dental implants had some advantages versus short 3 mm extra oral implants to provide proper anchorage for this heavy auricular prosthesis.13 We used bar and bridge abutment in the role of transcutaneous component, and because of fixation with an independent screw, other steps could be run without need to take out of this transcutaneous component. Placement of implants in antihelix part of future auricular prosthesis caused hiding of retentive components easy and provided esthetic and natural view which was accessed through a surgical stent which mimics final auricular prosthesis.


In this case report, we used dental implant and safe on four prosthetic systems for an auricular prosthesis.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship


Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Taylor JC Terrell JE Ronis DL Fowler KE Bishop C Lambert MT Disability in patients with head and neck cancerArch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004 130 764 9 Ciocca L Fantini M De Crescenzio F Persiani F Scotti R New protocol for construction of eyeglasses-supported provisional nasal prosthesis using CAD/CAM techniquesJ Rehabil Res Dev 2010 47 595 604 Dahl JE Polyzois GL Irritation test of tissue adhesives for facial prosthesesJ Prosthet Dent 2000 84 453 7 Goiato MC Pesqueira AA Ramos da Silva C Gennari Filho H Micheline Dos Santos D Patient satisfaction with maxillofacial prosthesis.Literature reviewJ Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009 62 175 80 Westin T Tjellström A Hammerlid E Bergström K Rangert B Long-term study of quality and safety of osseointegration for the retention of auricular prosthesesOtolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999 121 133 43 Chang TL Garrett N Roumanas E Beumer J 3rd Treatment satisfaction with facial prosthesesJ Prosthet Dent 2005 94 275 80 Goiato MC dos Santos DM Gennari-Filho H Zavanelli AC Dekon SF Mancuso DN Influence of investment, disinfection, and storage on the microhardness of ocular resinsJ Prosthodont 2009 18 32 5 Goiato MC Fernandes Santos DM Barão VA Positioning magnets on a multiple/sectional maxillofacial prosthesisJ Contemp Pract 200; 101 7 Sencimen M Bal HE Demirogullari M Kocaoglu M Dogan N Auricular episthesis retained by an attachment system (2 case reports)Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008 105 e28 34 dos Santos DM Goiato MC Pesqueira AA Bannwart LC Rezende MC Magro-Filho O Prosthesis auricular with osseointegrated implants and quality of lifeJ Craniofac Surg 2010 21 94 6 Aydin C Karakoca S Yilmaz H Yilmaz C Implant-retained auricular prostheses: an assessment of implant success and prosthetic complicationsInt J Prosthodont 2008 21 241 4 Wazen JJ Wright R Hatfield RB Asher ES Auricular rehabilitation with bone-anchored titanium implantsLaryngoscope 1999 109 523 7 Himmlova L Dostálová TJ Kácovský A Konvicková S Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: A finite element analysisJ Prosthet Dent 2004 91 20 5


  • There are currently no refbacks.