Otoplasty: critical review of clinical results.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 1865738.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Although it is generally believed that otoplasty provides uniformly gratifying results, thorough patient follow-up reviews are quite rare. Otoplasty surgery performed on 119 ears was retrospectively reviewed to assess the results of our cartilage-sparing technique. This method of otoplasty relies on a conchal set-back and suture transfixation technique to improve the antihelical contour. Auricular medialization averaged 10.3 mm. Over-correction is required, particularly in the superior pole, as loss of correction with healing was approximately 40% of the initial medialization. Revision surgery due to loss of correction was necessary for 6.6% of the ears initially operated on by the senior author. Patients who presented following cartilage-cutting procedures tended to have a higher rate of revision and persistent postoperative stigmata. Complications in general were few; however, mersilene suture extrusion occurred in 8% of ears. Only one of these required revision surgery for associated loss of correction. Despite these drawbacks, over 95% of patients achieved satisfactory results using cartilage-sparing otoplasty techniques.
Medical subject headings
- Ear, External
- Surgery, Plastic