A modification of incisionless otoplasty for correcting the prominent ear deformity

Abstract

This article describes a modification of the incisionless otoplasty. We investigated the complication rates, recurrence risks, and patient satisfaction with this modified procedure. In total, 26 patients (49 ears) complaining of prominent ear were operated on. Auriculocephalic distances were measured at three different levels, pre-operatively, at the end of the surgery, and at 4 weeks and 6 months after surgery to evaluate the efficacy of the technique. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analog scale and the global aesthetic improvement scale was applied by an independent non-participating plastic surgeon at 6 months after the surgery. The mean loss of medialization was ~1 mm at 4 weeks after surgery and 2 mm at 6 months after surgery for all levels. According to visual analog scale, patient or parent satisfaction increased significantly. The global aesthetic improvement scale rated the patients as 93.9% "improved" and 6.1% as "no change." No rating was "worse." There are many advantages of this technique. The operation is not time-consuming, does not require a dressing, and it can be performed in adults with local anesthesia under office conditions, with no need for hospitalization. After the operation, patients can return to their daily activities immediately. It is associated with a low complication rate and high patient satisfaction. This technique is a good option for otoplasty in patients with isolated, inadequate development of anti-helical ridge, and with soft auricular cartilage.

Pinnaplasty: improved access to the antihelical fold

“…There were three unilateral revisions and one bilateral revision required in over 100 operated ears (50 patients). These rates compare favourably to other techniques described in the literature …”

“…These rates compare favourably to other techniques described in the literature. 3 The authors acknowledge that in the case of associated conchal over projection, the technique would require a second post-auricular incision; however, both locations result in almost invisible scars. Another area of potential concern would be the anterior position of the knot securing the antihelical fold; however, it is neither visible nor palpable in our experience.…”

“…Each technique has advantages and disadvantages with no overall consensus on the optimal technique. Pinnaplasty has several recognised complications including haematoma, infection, skin or cartilage necrosis, re‐protrusion, asymmetry, suture expulsion and keloid scarring …”

“…Pinnaplasty has several recognised complications including haematoma, infection, skin or cartilage necrosis, re-protrusion, asymmetry, suture expulsion and keloid scarring. 3 Studies have demonstrated the benefit to the postoperative shape of the antihelix using anterior scoring in association with Mustard e sutures. 4 This combination is advocated by the lead author.…”

Otoplasty techniques in children: a comparative study of outcomes

“…The incidence of auricular deformities has been estimated to be as low as 11.5 per 10 000 live births and as high as 47% of all births . Numerous techniques have been described in the literature with recent trends moving towards less invasive options, ranging from nonsurgical newborn ear moulding to cartilage‐sparing surgical techniques and even incisionless, office‐based procedures . However, no specific technique has been described as the most effective for all cases.…”