Antihelix Plasty Without Modeling Sutures

Abstract

any techniques have been described for the surgical correction of protruding ears. A novel modification of a cartilage-sparing otoplastic technique is provided herein. In this modification, a diamond-coated file is used to abrade the anterior surface of the antihelical cartilage to create biomechanical remodeling with resultant formation of a new antihelix. A case series of 302 ears, operated on over a 3½-year period, is presented in support of this technique. This procedure is appropriate for patients having firm or soft auricular cartilage, an underdeveloped antihelical ridge, and a prominent or moderate hypertrophic conchal wall.

A modification of incisionless otoplasty for correcting the prominent ear deformity

“…In our technique, there is no need for any special surgical instrument. Raunig [15] described a technique to weaken the cartilage with a diamond rasp, and no suture was used, different to our technique. He used a compressive ear dressing for 7 days, and after removing the dressing, the desired antihelical shape was maintained by fixation to the mastoid skin with an adhesive strip for 6 weeks.…”

“…In our study, there were 98 sutures in 49 ears, and 14 of them were extruded (14.3 %). Considering the results of Raunig [15], none of these sutures were removed before the third month after the operation. Moreover, none of the patients where the sutures had to be removed had recurrence of prominent ear.…”

Optimal Electromechanical Reshaping of the Auricular Ear and Long-term Outcomes in an In Vivo Rabbit Model

“…5–10 Although these techniques have been used commonly during the past 2 decades, many of them require the use of sutures and/or cartilage scoring to weaken the cartilage at desired areas of curvature. 9,11,12 In addition, these techniques have been difficult to master, with a steep learning curve and poor outcomes owing to suture extrusion, asymmetry, and scarring.…”

Earfold: A New Technique for Correction of the Shape of the Antihelix

“…They noticed that when cartilage is incised on one side it has the tendency to warp to the opposite side. The original observations of Gibson and Davis have since given rise to a large number of modifications, all involving scoring, scratching, scraping, filing, rasping, abrading, or in some way damaging the anterior surface of the cartilage (Table ) . Other, more complex techniques are more akin to cartilage sculpting .…”

“…The original observations of Gibson and Davis have since given rise to a large number of modifications, all involving scoring, scratching, scraping, filing, rasping, abrading, or in some way damaging the anterior surface of the cartilage (Table I). [33][34][35][36] Other, more complex techniques are more akin to cartilage sculpting. 37,38 As with posterior suture techniques, the most common complications reported are recurrences of the original prominence and the need for reoperation (Table I).…”