Youngdae Lee1, Young Seok Kim2, Won Jai Lee3, Dong Kyun Rha3, Jiye Kim4. 1. MBW Aesthetic Plastic Surgical Clinic, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, 162 Ilsandong, Wonju, 220-701, Korea. gen80@yonsei.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prominent ear is the most common external ear deformity. To comprehensively treat prominent ear deformity, adequate comprehension of its pathophysiology is crucial. In this article, we analyze cases of prominent ear and suggest a simple classification system and treatment algorithm according to pathophysiology. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a total of 205 Northeast Asian patients' clinical data who underwent an operation for prominent ear deformity. Follow-up assessments were conducted 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Prominent ear deformities were classified by diagnostic checkpoints. Class I (simple prominent ear) includes prominent ear that developed with the absence of the antihelix without conchal hypertrophy. Class II (mixed-type prominent ear) is defined as having not only a flat antihelix, but also conchal excess. Class III (conchal-type prominent ear) has an enlarged conchal bowl with a well-developed antihelix. RESULTS: Among the three types of prominent ear, class I was most frequent (162 patients, 81.6%). Class II was observed in 28 patients (13.6%) and class III in 10 patients (4.8%). We used the scaphomastoid suture method for correction of antihelical effacement, the anterior approach conchal resection for correction of conchal hypertrophy, and Bauer's squid incision for lobule prominence. The complication rate was 9.2% including early hematoma, hypersensitivity, and suture extrusion. Unfavorable results occurred in 4% including partial recurrence, overcorrection, and undercorrection. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce unfavorable results and avoid recurrence, we propose the use of a classification and treatment algorithm in preoperative evaluation of prominent ear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
BACKGROUND: Prominent ear is the most common external ear deformity. To comprehensively treat prominent ear deformity, adequate comprehension of its pathophysiology is crucial. In this article, we analyze cases of prominent ear and suggest a simple classification system and treatment algorithm according to pathophysiology. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a total of 205 Northeast Asian patients' clinical data who underwent an operation for prominent ear deformity. Follow-up assessments were conducted 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Prominent ear deformities were classified by diagnostic checkpoints. Class I (simple prominent ear) includes prominent ear that developed with the absence of the antihelix without conchal hypertrophy. Class II (mixed-type prominent ear) is defined as having not only a flat antihelix, but also conchal excess. Class III (conchal-type prominent ear) has an enlarged conchal bowl with a well-developed antihelix. RESULTS: Among the three types of prominent ear, class I was most frequent (162 patients, 81.6%). Class II was observed in 28 patients (13.6%) and class III in 10 patients (4.8%). We used the scaphomastoid suture method for correction of antihelical effacement, the anterior approach conchal resection for correction of conchal hypertrophy, and Bauer's squid incision for lobule prominence. The complication rate was 9.2% including early hematoma, hypersensitivity, and suture extrusion. Unfavorable results occurred in 4% including partial recurrence, overcorrection, and undercorrection. CONCLUSIONS: To reduce unfavorable results and avoid recurrence, we propose the use of a classification and treatment algorithm in preoperative evaluation of prominent ear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .