The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2022
Revision Operation of the Unsatisfactory Microtia Reconstruction With Autologous Costal Cartilage.
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.
Huang Tianyu, Sun Hengyun, Yang Qinghua, Zhao Yanyong, Pan Bo, He Leren, Lin Lin, Jiang Haiyue
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Revision operation of the unsatisfactory microtia reconstruction is 1 of the most difficult revision operations in plastic surgery. This study discussed the cases about revision operation of the unsatisfactory or failed ear reconstruction using autologous costal cartilage and residual.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of all consecutive patients who underwent secondary total ear reconstruction from 2013 to 2020 was reviewed. Demographic data and outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with microtia met the inclusion criteria. The age of the patients who underwent secondary reconstruction ranged 6 to 56 years. The follow-up duration was from 1 to 8 years. Primary reconstruction using costal cartilage was performed in 34 cases, and Medpor (porous high-density polyethylene) were used in 2 cases. All 36 cases were treated with costal cartilage as the revision. One-stage revision was performed in 27 cases, including scaffold covered by superficial temporal fascia flap in 9 cases, retroauricular fascia flap in 12 cases and superficial temporal plus retroauricular fascia flap in 5 cases. Nine cases were renovated with expanders by stages, of which 8 cases were covered by retroauricular fascia and 1 case was covered by expanded skin flap. Complications occurred in 2 cases, and 1 patient was not satisfied with the partial scaffold repair.
CONCLUSIONS: The effect of revision operation of ear reconstruction with costal cartilage is satisfactory, and different methods of ear reconstruction are indicated in different operation conditions, and the revision surgery requires adequate preoperative evaluation.Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of all consecutive patients who underwent secondary total ear reconstruction from 2013 to 2020 was reviewed. Demographic data and outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with microtia met the inclusion criteria. The age of the patients who underwent secondary reconstruction ranged 6 to 56 years. The follow-up duration was from 1 to 8 years. Primary reconstruction using costal cartilage was performed in 34 cases, and Medpor (porous high-density polyethylene) were used in 2 cases. All 36 cases were treated with costal cartilage as the revision. One-stage revision was performed in 27 cases, including scaffold covered by superficial temporal fascia flap in 9 cases, retroauricular fascia flap in 12 cases and superficial temporal plus retroauricular fascia flap in 5 cases. Nine cases were renovated with expanders by stages, of which 8 cases were covered by retroauricular fascia and 1 case was covered by expanded skin flap. Complications occurred in 2 cases, and 1 patient was not satisfied with the partial scaffold repair.
CONCLUSIONS: The effect of revision operation of ear reconstruction with costal cartilage is satisfactory, and different methods of ear reconstruction are indicated in different operation conditions, and the revision surgery requires adequate preoperative evaluation.Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.