ArticleBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Modified bilateral fasciaperichondrial flap for prominent ear correction.
Article in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Objective Auricular Measurements and Patient Satisfaction Following Cartilage-Cutting Otoplasty Using Fascioperichondrial Flaps.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Mustardé, Fascioperichondrial Flap, and Combined Otoplasty Techniques: Clinical Outcomes and Recurrence Rates in 365 Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveVarious techniques have been described in the literature for prominent ear correction. These cartilage-preserving or cartilage-shaping techniques have their own advantages and disadvantages. We aim to achieve aesthetic and stable results with low complication rates using combinations of these methods. Herein, we present our results of prominent ear surgery with a modified bilateral fasciaperichondrial flap in combination with concha-mastoid and concha-scaphal sutures.
methodsPatients whose surgeries included a modified bilateral fasciaperichondrial flap for prominent ear deformities were included in the study. Patients' demographic data, pre- and postoperative Concha-Mastoid Angle (CMA) and upper-middle Helix-Mastoid Distances (HMD), follow-up time, complications, secondary operations, and postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) results were evaluated. With a postauricular fish-mouth incision, the bilateral fasciaperichondrial flap was planned into two: proximal- and distal-based. They were then elevated from the cartilage subperichondrially on the proximal side and supraperichondrially on the distal side. Concha-scaphal sutures were used to form an antihelical rim along with concha-mastoid sutures to reduce the concha-mastoid angle. Conchal cartilage resection was done if needed. Then, the bilateral fasciaperichondrial flaps were sutured together to cover the concha-mastoid and concha-scaphal sutures.
resultsBetween May 2017 and May 2021, 32 ears of 17 patients were operated on due to prominent ear deformity. No hematoma or infection was observed in any patient, and there were no instances of recurrence, suture exposure, hypertrophic scars, or keloids. The satisfaction level of all patients was 8.2 ± 0.9 points on average according to the VAS. In the anthropometric measurements, a statistically significant difference was found between preoperative and postoperative sixth month CMA and HMD values.
conclusionA combination of suture techniques and a modified bilateral fasciaperichondrial flap may be used in prominent ear cases, with low recurrence rates and high patient satisfaction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
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.