ArticleThe Journal of craniofacial surgery2024
A Study on the Nonsurgical Correction Treatment Age Window and Long-Term Follow-Up of Infants With Congenital Ear Anomalies in China.
Article in The Journal of craniofacial surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Evidence of the Effect of Breastfeeding on Ear Molding Outcomes: A Scoping Review.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of ear molding across various initial ages and analyze challenges encountered by infants beyond the optimal treatment age window.
methodsA retrospective review of 331 infants (527 ears) treated with EarWell was conducted over 5 years from January 2017 to March 2022 at a single center. The treatment duration of the ear molding, success rate, recurrence rate, and complication rate were analyzed among the 3 age groups. Concentrate on evaluating treatment outcomes for infants with an initial age exceeding 42 days.
resultsThe mean age at initial treatment was 25±28 days. In addition, it includes a child with cryptotia who is 3.5 years old (1278 d). The mean duration of treatment was 7±5 weeks. In the long-term follow-up, the overall treatment success rate was 92%, with 467 ears (88.6%) showing improvement without recurrence, 30 ears (5.7%) experiencing varying degrees of recurrence, and 30 ears (5.7%) showing no improvement or complete recurrence. A total of 20 infants (3%) developed mild skin complications during treatment.
conclusionsEar molding is a safe and effective option for the treatment of congenital ear anomalies, with a low recurrence rate during long-term follow-up. For infants with congenital auricular anomalies aged over 42 days, ear molding remains a viable option. Treatment success may be influenced by the age at treatment, the subtype of anomalies, and relies on the assessment of a specialized otologist, expert procedural techniques, as well as thorough understanding and cooperation from parents.
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.