Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40369216›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2025

Surgical outcome following primary closure of auricular lacerations.

Max Zwemstra, Simon Geerse, Maarten de Wolf, Fenna Ebbens, Cas Smits, Erik van Spronsen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Max ZwemstraDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.r.zwemstra@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-1089-6469
Simon GeerseDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten de WolfDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Fenna EbbensDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cas SmitsDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Erik van SpronsenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the aesthetic outcomes of primary closure of auricle lacerations in the emergency department.

methodsIn this prospective case study in our tertiary referral center we included all patients with an auricular laceration without complete avulsion. Wound treatment involved thorough cleaning and primary closure. Photos of the auricle were taken at various stages for evaluation. To evaluate the achieved results after 3 months, a success classification system with four classes was developed: (1) full success, no irregularities, (2) partial success, only minor irregularities, (3a) unsuccessful, major irregularities or (3b) unsuccessful, (partial) necrosis.

resultsMost patients demonstrated successful outcomes (60.7% full success and 32.1% partial success), with helical involvement being associated with inferior results. The interobserver percent agreement of the classification system was 88%. The Fleiss' kappa coefficient was 0.570, p < 0.001.

conclusionPrimary closure of ear lacerations results in a high success rate. We have introduced a revised classification system to qualify the success of treatment of the auricle laceration. Involvement of the helix is correlated with inferior surgical results three months after surgical closure. Trial registration number and date of registration: reference number W21_387 # 21.432, September 9, 2021.

Indexed as

Ear AuricleLacerationsAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultEar lacerationPrimary closureSuccess rate

Identifiers

PMID40369216
PMCPMC12518382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.