Comparison of two impression techniques for auricular prosthesis: Pilot study

1. Comparison of two impression techniques for auricular prosthesis: Pilot study Kasim Mohamed, MDS; U. M. Mani, MDS; M. K. Seenivasan, MDS; A. K. Vaidhyanathan, MDS; P. T. Veeravalli, MDS

2. Aim • Compare accuracy of new impression technique (triple-layer impression technique [TLIT]) with conventional impression technique (CIT) to fabricate auricular prostheses. • Relevance • Impression techniques play vital role in accurate reproduction of affected and unaffected ears, orientation of ear during wax try-in, and fabrication of ear prostheses.

3. Method • 10 markings made on subjects’ ears. • For 5 measurements: super aurale–sub aurale, pre aurale–post aurale, A–A1, B–B1, and C–C1) • Custom-made trays recorded impressions in CIT and TLIT using alginate. • Models were cast with type IV gypsum product. • Markings were transferred on cast and measures were rechecked. • Evaluated: • Distribution analysis of measurement differences between CIT and TLIT. • Subject’s actual values.

4. Results • Statistically significant differences found in measurements A–A1, B–B1, and C–C1 between the two techniques compared with subject’s actual dimensions (p < 0.01). • TLIT found to produce accurate models compared with CIT.

5. Conclusion • TLIT was cost effective, less technique sensitive, and tailor made to reduce chairside orientation time in wax try-in appointments for rehabilitation patients, especially those with unilateral auricular defects.