ArticleJournal of anatomy2024
Histological assessment of microtia cartilage, a potential source of autograft tissue in ear reconstruction.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unconventional auricular reconstruction using controlled scaffold buckling and chondrogenic cocktail containing muscle-derived cells.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- Innovative tissue engineering strategies for auricular regeneration in microtia: Current advances and future perspectives.Regenerative therapy · 2025Review
- Systematic Review on Microtia: Current Knowledge and Future Directions.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Histological assessment of microtia cartilage, a potential source of autograft tissue in ear reconstruction.Journal of anatomy · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cartilage is a strong and flexible connective tissue that has many forms and functions in our body. While cartilage exhibits some forms of limited repair, for the most part, it is not particularly regenerative. Thus, in situations where patients require cartilage reconstruction, surgeons may use autografts to replace missing or damaged tissue. Cartilage tissues from different regions of the body exhibit histological differences and are in limited supply. Thus, it is important to characterize these differences to determine the most appropriate autograft source. In the case of microtia, a congenital deformity where the pinna is underdeveloped, reconstruction commonly utilizes cartilage sourced from a patient's own costal cartilage. This presents a potential morbidity risk. In this study, we evaluate the histological characteristics of microtia cartilage compared with normal auricular and costal cartilage obtained from human patients undergoing surgical resection. Histochemistry was used to evaluate cellularity, lipid content, and ECM content. Using a Bayesian statistical approach, we determined that while costal cartilage is the standard tissue donor, the microanatomy of microtia cartilage more closely reflects normal auricular cartilage than costal cartilage. Therefore, microtia cartilage may serve as an additional reservoir for cartilage during 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.