Microtia Reconstruction Practices Among Otolaryngologists in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe current practices among otolaryngology-trained microtia surgeons in the United States.

STUDY

DESIGN

Survey.

SETTING

A tertiary care center.

METHODS

A 22-question anonymous digital survey of practice patterns and surgical methods was distributed to all members of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (AAFPRS) and the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology (ASPO). Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and linear regression models.

RESULTS

Of 1730 eligible members, 83 (4.8%) responses were collected. Forty-three (51.8%) were AAFPRS members, 39 (47.0%) were ASPO members, and 1 (1.2%) reported dual membership. Respondents had multiple practice settings, were at different stages in their experience, and were well-distributed geographically. Forty (48.2%) don't perform microtia repair and half (52.5%) refer to an FPRS-trained colleague. Among microtia surgeons, most (N = 30, 69.8%) received fellowship training. Autologous reconstruction was the most popular method for training and practice; however, most perform multiple methods (N = 33, 76.7%). Autologous rib training was positively correlated with experience of >20 years. Those with combined autologous/alloplastic practice were more frequently trained by PO fellowship. Surgical site infection was the most frequent complication and was seen more often by those trained via residency alone (OR 12.8, P < .05). Those who trained in autologous rib alone were less likely to encounter postoperative graft exposure (OR 5.0, P < .05); however, they were more likely to encounter skin and soft tissue infection (OR 0.07, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Otolaryngology-trained microtia surgeons come from a variety of academic backgrounds and progress to varied practices. They are trained and practice both alloplastic and autologous repair methods, although autologous methods remain the most common.