LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the alternatives for auricular reconstruction. 2. Discuss the pros and cons of autogenous reconstruction of total or subtotal auricular defects. 3. Enumerate the indications for prosthetic reconstruction of total or subtotal auricular defects. 4. Understand the complexity of and the expertise required for prosthetic reconstruction of auricular defects. The indications for autogenous auricular reconstruction versus prosthetic reconstruction with osseointegrated implant-retained prostheses were outlined in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 1994 by Wilkes et al. of Canada, but because of the relatively recent Food and Drug Administration approval (1995) of extraoral osseointegrated implants, these indications had not been examined by a surgical unit in the United States. The purpose of this article is to present an evolving algorithm based on an experience with 98 patients who underwent auricular reconstruction over a 10-year period. From this experience, the authors conclude that autogenous reconstruction is the procedure of choice in the majority of pediatric patients with microtia. Prosthetic reconstruction of the auricle is considered in such pediatric patients with congenital deformities for the following three relative indications: (1) failed autogenous reconstruction, (2) severe soft-tissue/skeletal hypoplasia, and/or (3) a low or unfavorable hairline. A fourth, and in our opinion the ideal, indication for prosthetic ear reconstruction is the acquired total or subtotal auricular defect, most often traumatic or ablative in origin, which is usually encountered in adults. Although prosthetic reconstruction requires surgical techniques that are less demanding than autogenous reconstruction, construction of the prosthesis is a time-consuming task requiring experience and expertise. Although autogenous reconstruction presents a technical challenge to the surgeon, it is the prosthetic reconstruction that requires lifelong attention and may be associated with late complications. This article reports the first American series of auricular reconstruction containing both autogenous and prosthetic methods by a single surgical team.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the alternatives for auricular reconstruction. 2. Discuss the pros and cons of autogenous reconstruction of total or subtotal auricular defects. 3. Enumerate the indications for prosthetic reconstruction of total or subtotal auricular defects. 4. Understand the complexity of and the expertise required for prosthetic reconstruction of auricular defects. The indications for autogenous auricular reconstruction versus prosthetic reconstruction with osseointegrated implant-retained prostheses were outlined in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in 1994 by Wilkes et al. of Canada, but because of the relatively recent Food and Drug Administration approval (1995) of extraoral osseointegrated implants, these indications had not been examined by a surgical unit in the United States. The purpose of this article is to present an evolving algorithm based on an experience with 98 patients who underwent auricular reconstruction over a 10-year period. From this experience, the authors conclude that autogenous reconstruction is the procedure of choice in the majority of pediatric patients with microtia. Prosthetic reconstruction of the auricle is considered in such pediatric patients with congenital deformities for the following three relative indications: (1) failed autogenous reconstruction, (2) severe soft-tissue/skeletal hypoplasia, and/or (3) a low or unfavorable hairline. A fourth, and in our opinion the ideal, indication for prosthetic ear reconstruction is the acquired total or subtotal auricular defect, most often traumatic or ablative in origin, which is usually encountered in adults. Although prosthetic reconstruction requires surgical techniques that are less demanding than autogenous reconstruction, construction of the prosthesis is a time-consuming task requiring experience and expertise. Although autogenous reconstruction presents a technical challenge to the surgeon, it is the prosthetic reconstruction that requires lifelong attention and may be associated with late complications. This article reports the first American series of auricular reconstruction containing both autogenous and prosthetic methods by a single surgical team.
Authors: Thomas M Cervantes; Erik K Bassett; Alan Tseng; Anya Kimura; Nick Roscioli; Mark A Randolph; Joseph P Vacanti; Theresa A Hadlock; Rajiv Gupta; Irina Pomerantseva; Cathryn A Sundback Journal: J R Soc Interface Date: 2013-07-31 Impact factor: 4.118