ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2019
A Comparative Finite Element Analysis of Two Surgical Methods for Cryptotia.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical Correction of Cryptotia with Double V-Y Advancement Technique.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2025Article
- Finite Element Analysis to Study Tensile Strength Differences between Free and Attached Ear Lobules.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023Article
- Preoperative Flap Surgery Simulation for a Case of Cryptotia Using a 3D Printer.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cryptotia is an auricular muscle abnormality that causes the superior and posterior auricular area to be buried under the temporal skin. Surgical treatment approaches can be divided into skin grafts and local flaps. Complex cases also require cartilage/muscle modification. In this study, we treated one case each with the Square flap method and the Cat's Ear flap method. The aim was to help surgeons select the most appropriate surgical procedure on a case-by-case basis.
methodsTwo typical cryptotia cases were treated with the Square or Cat's Ear flap method. Finite element analysis was performed with ADINA v8.9 software, a PC (Windows 7, CPU: Core i7, Memory: 8 GB), and a hyperelastic skin model (skin diameter 20 cm; thickness 2 mm). The model scales were about 500 nodes and 500 elements (tetrahedron).
resultsThe Square flap method involved advancing the square flap between the two triangular flaps. Switching then generated dog-ears that created a big valley. In the Cat's Ear flap method, the two triangular flaps were rotated in the same direction, whereas a square flap was advanced slightly on the opposite side. This created a large dog-ear.
conclusionsThis study suggested that the Cat's Ear flap method may be particularly useful for cryptotia patients whose posterior auricular groove is shallow when the buried helix is pulled out. The Square flap method may be suitable for other cases because it effectively extrudes the buried helix with comparatively small excision.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.