Cited by 4Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments

Ear Molding in Children—Timing, Technique, and Follow-up: A Systematic Review

Sulibhavi, Anita, Reddy, Sai P., Butts, Sydney C., Schmalbach, Cecelia E.·2024·Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine

Abstract

Background: Nonsurgical management of congenital ear anomalies using molding devices shows efficacy but lacks standardization of treatment protocols and outcome measures. Learning Objective: To compare ear molding techniques and identify factors related to treatment outcomes. Design Type: Systematic review of the literature (1990–2021). Methods: Studies reporting molding for congenital ear anomalies were assessed. PRISMA guidelines were used. Data extracted included: age at treatment initiation, treatment duration, correction rates, and complications. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and outcomes were compared using the Student t -test. Results: In total, 37 studies with 3,341 patients (mean patients per study, 95; range, 5–488) were included. Infants in whom treatment was initiated at 4.8 weeks (median, 3.7; range, 0.9–8.8 weeks) were treated for 5.1 weeks (median 4.7, range 2.6–7.6 weeks) with 11.0 months follow-up (median 11.4, range 1.4–21.0 months). Individualized devices (physician-customized) were used more (62.2% of studies) than commercial devices. No difference in correction ( p = 0.44) or complication rates ( p = 0.19) was identified between devices. Totally, 70.3% of studies reported complications and 40.5% of studies included long-term follow-up data. Conclusions: The available evidence supports initiating ear molding in the first weeks of life to be most effective, yet outcome data should be standardized in future studies to improve evidence quality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/fpsam.2023.0321

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Nonsurgical approaches, such as newborn auricular molding, leverage early cartilage plasticity with promising outcomes.

    “Nonsurgical approaches, such as newborn auricular molding, leverage early cartilage plasticity with promising outcomes.70–73”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Naumann A. Otoplasty—techniques, characteristics and risks. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007; 6:Doc04.
  2. Mohammadi AA, , Imani MT, , Kardeh S, et al. Non-surgical management of congenital auricular deformities. World J Plast Surg. 2016; 5(2):139–147.
  3. Ainuz B, , Grant J, , Scheiwe S, et al. Clay ear molding treatment protocol for infants: Description and outcomes. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J, 2021; 58(4):113.
  4. Brown S, , Wetz E, , Grant J, et al. Neonatal ear molding: A PRACTICAL HANDS-ON INSTRUCTIONAL COURSE. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J, 2019; 56(1):7–8.
  5. Gray R, , Bastidas N, , Abraham H, et al. Successful nonsurgical correction of late-presenting infant ear deformities. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J, 2019; 56(1):80.
  6. Leonardi A, , Bianca C, , Basile E, et al. Neonatal molding in deformational auricolar anomalies. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012; 16(11):1554–1558.
  7. Tan S, , Wright A, , Hemphill A, et al. Correction of deformational auricular anomalies by moulding–results of a fast-track service. N Z Med J. 2003; 116(1181):U584. Published 2003 Sep 12.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sulibhavi, A., Reddy, S. P., Butts, S. C., & Schmalbach, C. E.
Affiliations
  • Temple University (US)
  • SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University (US)
Corresponding author
Schmalbach, Cecelia E.
Venue
Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine
Published
2024-11-01
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
730-739
ISSN
  • 2689-3614 (ISSN-L)
  • 2689-3622
OpenAlex
W4400318969
Cited by
4
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Facial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Craniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Keywords
congenital ear anomalies, children, treatment timing, treatment outcomes, complications, long-term follow-up, correction rate
MeSH terms
Child, Ear, External, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review