Digital workflow for the rehabilitation of a geriatric patient with microtia using open-source software

Authors

Keywords:

Geriatrics; Rehabilitation; Digital Technology; Computer-Aided Design; Microtia; Maxillofacial Prosthesis; 3D Printing; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Quality of Life; Chile

Abstract

Introduction: microtia is defined as a congenital hypoplastic malformation of the auricle (external ear), with severity ranging from a slight reduction in auricular size to complete absence of the external ear. It is usually unilateral and may present noticeable asymmetry.

Objective: the present study was to fabricate an adhesive auricular prosthesis for diagnostic purposes using a fully digital workflow. The advantages of the digital methodology were evaluated in terms of diagnostic accuracy, patient comfort and treatment efficiency.

Case report: the patient was an 82-year-old male with no relevant systemic conditions. Extraoral examination revealed microtia of the right auricle, classified as Tanzer Type II and Hunter Grade III. A 3D facial scan was acquired using a structured light scanner. Once the 3D-printed prosthetic design was obtained, it was clinically evaluated to verify its adaptation, positioning, and morphology. Upon approval, medical-grade silicone was used to fabricate the definitive prosthesis.

Conclusions: this clinical case highlights the significant advantages of digital technology in the rehabilitation of geriatric patients with auricular defects. The integration of digital workflows with analog techniques provides an effective approach to enhance the precision, comfort, and aesthetic outcomes of prosthetic treatment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Liaw J, Patel VA, Carr MM. Congenital anomalies of the external ear. Oper Tech Otolaryngol-Head Neck Surg [Internet]. 2017 Jun 1;28(2):72–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otot.2017.03.012

2. Kelley PE, Scholes MA. Microtia and Congenital Aural Atresia. Otolaryngol Clin North Am [Internet]. 2007 Feb 1;40(1):61–80. Available from: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.otc.2006.10.003

3. Tan T, Constantinides H, Mitchell TE. The preauricular sinus: A review of its aetiology, clinical presentation and management. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol [Internet]. 2005 Nov 1;69(11):1469–74. Available from: https://doi:org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2005.07.008

4. Malick R, Sham ME, Reddy TJ, Jacob PC. Reconstruction of the external ear using implant-supported alloplasts—Our experience. Natl J Maxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2023 Nov 10;14(3):499. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/njms.njms_160_22

5. Hamlet C, Harcourt D. Exploring the Experiences of Adults With Microtia: A Qualitative Study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J [Internet]. 2020 Jul 9;57(10):1230. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620931611

6. Cobein MV, Coto NP, Crivello Junior O, Lemos JBD, Vieira LM, Pimentel ML, et al. Retention systems for extraoral maxillofacial prosthetic implants: a critical review. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2017 Oct 1;55(8):763–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2017.04.012

7. Diken Türksayar AA, Saglam SA, Bulut AC. Retention Systems Used in Maxillofacial Prostheses: A Review. Niger J Clin Pract [Internet]. 2019 Dec;22(12):1629. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_92_19

8. Khan U, Dhawan P, Jain N. The Survival Rate of the Retention System for Extraoral Maxillofacial Prosthetic Implant: A Systematic Review. Cureus [Internet]. 2024 Oct 2;16(10):e70705. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.70705

9. Zhang TY, Bulstrode N, Chang KW, Cho YS, Frenzel H, Jiang D, et al. International Consensus Recommendations on Microtia, Aural Atresia and Functional Ear Reconstruction. J Int Adv Otol. 2019 Aug;15(2):204–8. Available fron: http://doi.org/ 10.5152/iao.2019.7383

10. Lewin S, Bishop R, Woerner JE, Yates D. Three Techniques for Reconstruction of Congenital Microtia: Porous Implant Ear Reconstruction, Auricular Reconstruction Using Autologous Rib, and Osseointegrated Craniofacial Implants with Auricular Prosthesis. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin [Internet]. 2022 Mar 1;30(1):113–28. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cxom.2021.11.009

11. Heydenrych A, van der Walt JG, van den Heever HJ. Auricular prosthesis positioning using virtual planning in combination with additive manufacturing. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg [Internet]. 2023 Feb 1;124(1):101258. Available from: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.08.001

12. Suresh N, Janakiram C, Nayar S, Krishnapriya VN, Mathew A. Effectiveness of digital data acquisition technologies in the fabrication of maxillofacial prostheses – A systematic review. J Oral Biol Craniofacial Res [Internet]. 2021 Dec 30;12(1):208. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2021.12.004

13. Unkovskiy A, Spintzyk S, Brom J, Huettig F, Keutel C. Direct 3D printing of silicone facial prostheses: A preliminary experience in digital workflow. J Prosthet Dent [Internet]. 2018 Aug;120(2):303–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.11.007

14. Salazar-Gamarra R, Cárdenas-Bocanegra A, Masch U, Moraes CADC, Seelaus R, Silva JVLD, et al. Color translation from monoscopic photogrammetry +ID Methodology into a Polyjet final 3D printed facial prosthesis. F1000Research [Internet]. 2022 May 27;11:582. Available from: https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.111196.1

15. Salazar-Gamarra R, Binasco S, Seelaus R, Dib LL. Present and future of extraoral maxillofacial prosthodontics: Cancer rehabilitation. Front Oral Health [Internet]. 2022 Oct 19;3:1003430. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/froh.2022.1003430

16. Cardoso RC, Montgomery PC, Kiat-Amnuay S. Extraoral Maxillofacial Prosthetic Materials: Results of the 2020 International Survey. Int J Prosthodont. 2023 Nov 1;36(5):570–80. Available from: https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.7970

17. Bruns N. Blender. Universelle 3D-Bearbeitungs- und Animationssoftware. Die Unfallchirurgie [Internet]. 2020 Sep 1;123(9):747–50. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-020-00836-0

Downloads

Published

2026-03-04

How to Cite

1.
Silva González CA, Córdova González S, Campos Vierling NE, Chaple Gil AM, Vidal Vera GW, Toro González MA. Digital workflow for the rehabilitation of a geriatric patient with microtia using open-source software. Rev Cubana Estomatol [Internet]. 2026 Mar. 4 [cited 2026 Mar. 7];63:e5227. Available from: https://revestomatologia.sld.cu/index.php/est/article/view/5227

Issue

Vol. 63 (2026): publicación continua

Section

Case Report

License

Copyright (c) 2026 César Alberto Silva González, Sebastián Córdova González, Nelson Eduardo Campos Vierling, Alain Manuel Chaple Gil, Guido Washington Vidal Vera, Mauricio Antonio Toro González

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors retain all rights to their works, which they can reproduce and distribute as long as they cite the primary source of publication.

The Rev Cubana Estomatol is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) and follows the publication model of SciELO Publishing Schema (SciELO PS) for publication in XML format.

You are free to:

  • Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

  • You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
  • No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.