Qianger Zhuang1,2, Ning Wei1, Qi Zhou1, Hui Wang2, Yaqin Wu2, Zhengnong Chen3, Dongzhen Yu4, Pengjun Wang5, Haibo Shi2,6. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Wuxi Children's Hospital, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the Sixth People's Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. 3. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the Sixth People's Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. jassey@126.com. 4. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the Sixth People's Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. drdzyu@126.com. 5. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, the Sixth People's Hospital affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University, 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. wangpj@sjtu.edu.cn. 6. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Sleep Disordered Breathing, Shanghai, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Given the incidence of congenital auricular anomalies varies racially, this study aimed to investigate the efficacy and timing of ear correction molding in infants with auricular anomalies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 141 auricular anomalies of 100 infants less than 4 months of age were treated using the Earlimn molding system. Treatment outcomes were graded (three categories) in terms of auricular morphology. The efficacies and outcomes of modeling were evaluated in infants according to age and anomaly type. RESULTS: The mean age at which correction was initiated was 35.13 days of life, and the average treatment duration was 17.81 days. Of all anomalies, 86% were corrected. Both deformations and certain malformations were satisfactorily corrected. The outcomes of children with conchal crura and mixed anomalies were relatively poor. Although no differences in treatment efficiency were evident among the three age groups, infants < 3 weeks old required shorter treatment courses than those > 6 weeks old. The only complications were mild skin ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: Ear correction molding is remarkably effective for infants with auricular deformations/malformations. Molding efficacy depends on the type of anomaly. Initiation of molding at less than 6 weeks of age is essential to minimize treatment duration. 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 AND AIM: Given the incidence of congenital auricular anomalies varies racially, this study aimed to investigate the efficacy and timing of ear correction molding in infants with auricular anomalies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 141 auricular anomalies of 100 infants less than 4 months of age were treated using the Earlimn molding system. Treatment outcomes were graded (three categories) in terms of auricular morphology. The efficacies and outcomes of modeling were evaluated in infants according to age and anomaly type. RESULTS: The mean age at which correction was initiated was 35.13 days of life, and the average treatment duration was 17.81 days. Of all anomalies, 86% were corrected. Both deformations and certain malformations were satisfactorily corrected. The outcomes of children with conchal crura and mixed anomalies were relatively poor. Although no differences in treatment efficiency were evident among the three age groups, infants < 3 weeks old required shorter treatment courses than those > 6 weeks old. The only complications were mild skin ulcers. CONCLUSIONS: Ear correction molding is remarkably effective for infants with auricular deformations/malformations. Molding efficacy depends on the type of anomaly. Initiation of molding at less than 6 weeks of age is essential to minimize treatment duration. 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.