BACKGROUND: Otoplasty for prominent ears is a routine procedure that is generally met with satisfaction by patients and family members. A significant percentage of patients requesting otoplasty, however, have some degree of macrotia in addition to protruding ears. Combining ear reduction with traditional otoplasty allows correction of these deformities. There are few studies in the literature that describe ear reduction, and those that do, describe small subsets of patients. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of the senior author's (C.H.T.) otoplasty procedures from 2010 to 2013. Charts were reviewed for patient demographics, preoperative assessment, surgical technique used, complications, and need for revision. All otoplasty procedures, primary or secondary, were included in the series. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, 84 total otoplasty procedures were performed. Of these, 30 patients had some degree of scaphal reduction as a component of the procedure. Five patients (6 percent) also had shortening of the earlobes in addition to the scaphal reduction. Nineteen of the patients (23 percent) had an otoplasty previously (none performed by the senior author) but were not completely satisfied. Complications of reduction otoplasty were limited to a single patient with a suture protrusion behind the ear. None of the patients in this series have required reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Scaphal reduction to modify the contour of the upper auricle and/or decrease the overall size of the ear can be a valuable adjunct to otoplasty and may be indicated in a larger than expected percentage of patients presenting for otoplasty. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
BACKGROUND: Otoplasty for prominent ears is a routine procedure that is generally met with satisfaction by patients and family members. A significant percentage of patients requesting otoplasty, however, have some degree of macrotia in addition to protruding ears. Combining ear reduction with traditional otoplasty allows correction of these deformities. There are few studies in the literature that describe ear reduction, and those that do, describe small subsets of patients. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of the senior author's (C.H.T.) otoplasty procedures from 2010 to 2013. Charts were reviewed for patient demographics, preoperative assessment, surgical technique used, complications, and need for revision. All otoplasty procedures, primary or secondary, were included in the series. RESULTS: Over a 3-year period, 84 total otoplasty procedures were performed. Of these, 30 patients had some degree of scaphal reduction as a component of the procedure. Five patients (6 percent) also had shortening of the earlobes in addition to the scaphal reduction. Nineteen of the patients (23 percent) had an otoplasty previously (none performed by the senior author) but were not completely satisfied. Complications of reduction otoplasty were limited to a single patient with a suture protrusion behind the ear. None of the patients in this series have required reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Scaphal reduction to modify the contour of the upper auricle and/or decrease the overall size of the ear can be a valuable adjunct to otoplasty and may be indicated in a larger than expected percentage of patients presenting for otoplasty. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
Authors: Johannes A Smit; Dominique W Coenen; Eline A van Amerongen; P Quinten Ruhé; Corstiaan C Breugem Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2020-06-09