ArticleThe Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association2024
Porous Polyethylene Versus Autologous Costochondral Reconstruction for Microtia: Incidence and Analysis of Secondary Procedures.
Article in The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, 2024. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postoperative Cutaneous Sensory Recovery After Different Surgical Approaches for Microtia and Ear Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
- Early Postoperative Complications in Microtia Reconstruction: An Analysis of the NSQIP-P Database.The Laryngoscope · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the frequency of autologous and alloplastic ear reconstructions for patients with microtia in the United States, and describe post-index procedure rates associated with each method.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingClaims data from 500 + hospitals from IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases. PATIENTS/
participantsA total of 649 patients aged 1 to 17 years with International Classification of Diseases, ninth/tenth revision (ICD-9/10) diagnoses for microtia, congenital absence of the ear, or hemifacial microsomia.
interventionsAlloplastic or autologous ear reconstruction between 2006 and 2018.
main outcome measurePost-index procedures performed within 1 year following the index repair, analyzed across the study period and separately for each half of the study period (2006-2012, 2012-2018).
resultsA total of 486 (75%) qualifying patients received autologous and 163 (25%) received alloplastic reconstruction. Secondary procedure rates were significantly higher in the autologous group at 90 days (
conclusionsIn these databases, autologous reconstruction is more common than alloplastic reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction is staged, with most undergoing a secondary procedure between 3 months and 1 year postoperatively. Secondary procedure rates decreased over time in patients undergoing alloplastic reconstruction.
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.