A new method using tissue expander makes auricular reconstruction easier

Yang, Ming; Jiang, Haiyue; Zhang, Ye; Pan, Bo

doi:10.1111/coa.13304

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 2637 literatures were retrieved. After screening, 29 articles 5–33 were included in this meta-analysis. The articles screening process was shown in Figure 1 (the features of the included literature were shown in Supplementary Digital Content, Table 1, http://links.lww.com/SCS/D421).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Auricle Reconstruction Using Tissue Expanders With Skin Grafting and Auricle Reconstruction Using Tissue Expanders Without Skin Grafting: A Single-Arm Meta-Analysis

Sun

Zhao

Wang

et al. 2021

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The authors conducted this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders with skin grafting and auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders without skin grafting by comparing the 6 major evaluation indicators. Methods: The databases such as PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP information databases were searched. Results: By comparison, the authors found that, the satisfaction rate, the incidence of postoperative hematoma, the incidence of postoperative incision infection, and the incidence of cartilage framework exposure of patients with auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders with skin grafting were all lower than those with auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders without skin grafting. However, the incidence of postoperative skin necrosis, the incidence of leakage or exposure of expanders in patients with auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders with skin grafting were all higher than those with auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders without skin grafting. Conclusions: Auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders with skin grafting has advantages in reducing the incidence of postoperative hematoma, the incidence of postoperative incision infection, and the incidence of cartilage framework exposure. Auricle reconstruction using tissue expanders without skin grafting has advantages in improving the satisfaction rate, reducing the incidence of postoperative skin necrosis, and the incidence of leakage or exposure of expanders. From the comparison of specific data, there is no significant difference in the treatment effect between the 2 surgical methods.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Auricle Reconstruction Using Tissue Expanders With Skin Grafting and Auricle Reconstruction Using Tissue Expanders Without Skin Grafting: A Single-Arm Meta-Analysis

Sun

Zhao

Wang

et al. 2021

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At present, the main treatment for microtia is ear reconstruction 2 . Skin dilators play an important role in ear reconstruction 3 . In the 1950s, Neumann, who was an American plastic surgeon, first used skin dilators for auricular reconstruction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study on the therapeutic effects of biplane skin dilator implantation in auricular reconstruction

Sun

Lü

Wang

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of biplane skin dilator implantation with those of conventional skin dilator implantation in auricular reconstruction. A total of 137 patients with microtia who met the inclusion criteria from January 2020 to April 2021 were retrospectively selected. Sixty-three patients comprised the control group and were implanted with a skin expander using the conventional method. Seventy-four patients comprised the experimental group and were implanted with a skin expander using the biplane method. Non-parametric tests were used to compare the down-moving distance of the skin dilator between the experimental group and the control group. There was a statistically significant difference in the down-moving distance of the skin dilator between the experimental group and the control group (P < 0.05). The chi-square test showed no significant difference in postoperative complications between the experimental group and the control group (P > 0.05). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the satisfaction rate of patients and their families between the experimental group and the control group (P > 0.05). In this study, the treatment effect of biplane skin dilator implantation was better than that of conventional skin dilator implantation.

show abstract

“… 3 Despite the low prevalence, this entity strongly affects children’s facial appearance and mental health. 4 The most effective method for treating congenital microtia is auricular reconstruction. After surgical intervention, the reconstructed and contralateral ear should have the same size and position.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%