MedElevator
Войти в исследования Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2018
Earfold Implantable Clip System for Correction of Prominent Ears: Analysis of Safety in 403 Patients.
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.
Kang Norbert V, Sojitra Nilesh, Glumicic Sinisa, Vlok Jacobus A, O'Toole Greg, Hannan S Alam, Sabbagh Walid
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Earfold system, a new treatment for the correction of prominent ears, consists of 3 components: the Earfold implant, the Earfold introducer, and the Prefold positioner.
METHODS: This is an interim report based on an ongoing analysis of safety in a series of patients treated for prominent ears with the Earfold implant between February 2013 and September 2014. Safety was assessed based on adverse event reports and the need for implant revision; follow-up is ongoing.
RESULTS: Seven surgeons used 1,200 Earfold implants to treat 403 patients (ages, 7-70 years; 63% male); the time since the initial implant procedure now ranges from 30 to 48 months. To date, 145 patients (36%) have returned for a follow-up visit (mean, 7.7 months [range, 1-34 months]). Adverse events requiring intervention have affected 39 of 403 (9.7%) patients; these include implant revisions (n = 17 [4.2%], most often due to implant visibility), skin erosion over the implant (n = 15 [3.7%]), and infection (n = 7 [1.7%]). Bleeding, recurrence of prominence, hematoma, deformity, or adverse scarring did not occur.
CONCLUSIONS: This interim analysis has shown that Earfold prominent ear correction system is associated with relatively few adverse events that require intervention; a small number of patients experienced infection, implant extrusion, or implant visibility that required revision. Most adverse events were related to either patient selection or technical errors at implantation. It is expected that with continued use of Earfold by surgeons experienced in otoplasty, the adverse event incidence will decrease.
METHODS: This is an interim report based on an ongoing analysis of safety in a series of patients treated for prominent ears with the Earfold implant between February 2013 and September 2014. Safety was assessed based on adverse event reports and the need for implant revision; follow-up is ongoing.
RESULTS: Seven surgeons used 1,200 Earfold implants to treat 403 patients (ages, 7-70 years; 63% male); the time since the initial implant procedure now ranges from 30 to 48 months. To date, 145 patients (36%) have returned for a follow-up visit (mean, 7.7 months [range, 1-34 months]). Adverse events requiring intervention have affected 39 of 403 (9.7%) patients; these include implant revisions (n = 17 [4.2%], most often due to implant visibility), skin erosion over the implant (n = 15 [3.7%]), and infection (n = 7 [1.7%]). Bleeding, recurrence of prominence, hematoma, deformity, or adverse scarring did not occur.
CONCLUSIONS: This interim analysis has shown that Earfold prominent ear correction system is associated with relatively few adverse events that require intervention; a small number of patients experienced infection, implant extrusion, or implant visibility that required revision. Most adverse events were related to either patient selection or technical errors at implantation. It is expected that with continued use of Earfold by surgeons experienced in otoplasty, the adverse event incidence will decrease.