MedElevator
Войти в исследования The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2019
Treatment of the Prominent Ear: A Standardized Approach Without Intraoperative Measurements.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
MacIsaac Zoe M, Zammerilla Lauren, Grunwaldt Lorelei J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Candidates for otoplasty have variable anatomy that may result in an aesthetically suboptimal appearance. The authors describe an algorithm to obtain ideal aesthetic position of the ear using a standardized suturing only technique.
METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted at a major children's hospital. Pre- and postoperative distances from the mastoid to the posterior lateral helical rim were measured at 3 consistent points (upper helix, mid helix, and lobule). Cosmetic outcomes were determined by visual analog cosmetic score (VACS), assigned by 3 independent reviewers.
RESULTS: A total of 26 patients underwent otoplasty for prominent ear (average age 8.2 years). Duration of follow-up was an average of 32 weeks postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative VACSs were determined for all patients: overall-appearance, 25.8 versus 71.3; overall-ear appearance, 25.7 versus 70.0; shape, 24.4 versus 72.6; and projection, 23.7 versus 73.9 (P < 0.05 for all). There was no inter-rater difference between scores. There was greater symmetry between ears postoperatively (P < 0.05). Measurements were significantly improved pre- versus postoperatively: upper-helix 2.04 versus 1.20 cm, mid-helix 2.22 versus 1.18 cm, and lobule 1.85 versus 1.49 cm (P < 0.05.) Postoperative measurements are in accordance with established norms for ideal ear position (1.0-1.2 cm upper third of the ear). Two patients recurred, and 1 experienced a spitting suture (11.5%).
CONCLUSION: Aesthetic ideal was established on the operating table based on the appearance of the ear. Postoperative measurements fell within aesthetic ideal for a normal ear, suggesting that the use of intraoperative measurements are not needed to obtain an aesthetically acceptable outcome.
METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted at a major children's hospital. Pre- and postoperative distances from the mastoid to the posterior lateral helical rim were measured at 3 consistent points (upper helix, mid helix, and lobule). Cosmetic outcomes were determined by visual analog cosmetic score (VACS), assigned by 3 independent reviewers.
RESULTS: A total of 26 patients underwent otoplasty for prominent ear (average age 8.2 years). Duration of follow-up was an average of 32 weeks postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative VACSs were determined for all patients: overall-appearance, 25.8 versus 71.3; overall-ear appearance, 25.7 versus 70.0; shape, 24.4 versus 72.6; and projection, 23.7 versus 73.9 (P < 0.05 for all). There was no inter-rater difference between scores. There was greater symmetry between ears postoperatively (P < 0.05). Measurements were significantly improved pre- versus postoperatively: upper-helix 2.04 versus 1.20 cm, mid-helix 2.22 versus 1.18 cm, and lobule 1.85 versus 1.49 cm (P < 0.05.) Postoperative measurements are in accordance with established norms for ideal ear position (1.0-1.2 cm upper third of the ear). Two patients recurred, and 1 experienced a spitting suture (11.5%).
CONCLUSION: Aesthetic ideal was established on the operating table based on the appearance of the ear. Postoperative measurements fell within aesthetic ideal for a normal ear, suggesting that the use of intraoperative measurements are not needed to obtain an aesthetically acceptable outcome.