ArticleTranslational pediatrics2022
A novel method to accurately locate the reconstructed auricle.
Article in Translational pediatrics, 2022. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retrospective analysis of the clinical value of targeted nursing using a game-based model in children undergoing auricular reconstruction for congenital microtia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- An ear-shaped film with a "leg".Translational pediatrics · 2023Article
- Preoperation, In-operation, Post-operation and Complications Management Lessons from 1012 Ear Reconstruction Operations.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Congenital microtia is a common congenital disease in children, the cause of which is still unclear. At present, the main treatment for congenital microtia is ear reconstruction. Accurately locating of the reconstructed ear on the affected side before ear reconstruction surgery is difficult, while it is the key of successful operation. Our ear reconstruction team has developed a novel method to accurately locate the reconstructed auricle. This novel method has achieved good results in clinical practice. Methods: Thirty patients with unilateral ear reconstruction, who underwent auricle reconstruction using our invented auricle reconstruction positioning method in the Plastic Surgery Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2020 to July 2021, were enrolled in this study. Results: Through Wilcoxon signed rank test, we found that there was no statistical difference between the mean distance from the highest point of the patient's normal ear to the central axis of the nose and that from the highest point of the reconstructed ear to the central axis of the nose (P>0.05). Meanwhile, there was no statistical difference between the mean distance from the lowest point of the patient's normal ear to the central axis of the nose and that from the lowest point of the reconstructed ear to the central axis of the nose (P>0.05). The satisfaction rate of patients and their families to the location of the reconstructed auricle was 100%. Conclusions: The novel method of locating the reconstructed auricle employs simple materials. The implementation process is easy, and the effect is significant. To a certain extent, it solves the difficulty of locating the reconstructed auricle in ear reconstruction operation. Although this method can only be applied to patients with unilateral microtia, we recommend it for locating the reconstructed auricle by every plastic surgeon.
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.