Cited by 1Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesEar and Head Tumors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Anterior Ear Reconstruction with the Posterior Pull-through Flap

Open access
Gatti, John E., Charipova, Karina, Sollitto, Robert B.·2023·Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

Abstract

Background: Defects of the central ear after skin cancer removal remain a common problem for the reconstructive surgeon. The experience with a one-stage, postauricular, skin-island flap passed through the cartilage to reconstruct ear defects is reported. Methods: Patients with an intact ear helix and an anterior full-thickness defect (cartilage defects included) were reconstructed with a skin-island flap based on posterior subcutaneous tissue deep to the flap base. The flap was passed through a generous aperture created in the ear cartilage. The skin at the base was incised superficially after the flap was passed through the cartilage to create a skin-island and avoid burial of epithelium. The flap periphery and postauricular harvest site were sutured with absorbable chromic sutures. Results: Twenty-two patients (six women, 16 men) with ear defects underwent single-stage reconstruction over a 9-year period. The defects reconstructed measured in diameter from 2 cm to 4.5 cm. Six patients required a second skin flap from the preauricular area to close ear canal defects. The pull-through flap added structural support, and prevented ear distortion. No flap necrosis occurred. Venous congestion was common and self-limiting. No epithelial cysts developed. Conclusions: A one-stage postauricular skin-island flap can reliably reconstruct anterior ear defects without distorting shape or position of the ear. Care is needed to provide a generous aperture through the ear cartilage to accommodate the flap. Healing proceeds predictably, and minimal complications are associated with this posteriorly-based, pass-through, skin-island flap in ear reconstruction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/gox.0000000000005338

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1. Algorithm for management of anterior ear skin carcinoma.
Fig. 1. Algorithm for management of anterior ear skin carcinoma.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 2. Ear defect and plan of flap. A, Defect of anterior left ear after Mohs micrographic surgery for a basal cell cancer. B, Superiorly based flap design for the 3-cm defect of the anterior left ear.
Fig. 2. Ear defect and plan of flap. A, Defect of anterior left ear after Mohs micrographic surgery for a basal cell cancer. B, Superiorly based flap design for the 3-cm defect of the anterior left ear.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 3. Aperture of cartilage for flap. A, Generous aperture through cartilage of the left ear for passage of flap. B, Posterior pull-through flap passed into defect of the left ear.
Fig. 3. Aperture of cartilage for flap. A, Generous aperture through cartilage of the left ear for passage of flap. B, Posterior pull-through flap passed into defect of the left ear.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 4. Right ear reconstruction flap with superficial skin incision shown at the base of superiorly based pull-through flap.
Fig. 4. Right ear reconstruction flap with superficial skin incision shown at the base of superiorly based pull-through flap.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 5. Primary closure of right ear postauricular site after flap inset. Chromic sutures are shown.
Fig. 5. Primary closure of right ear postauricular site after flap inset. Chromic sutures are shown.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 6. Complex concha-ear canal defect. A, Design of two flaps for reconstruction of concha and circumferential ear canal defect of the right ear. Superiorly based preauricular flap shown. B, Inset of flaps to reconstruct concha and circumferential canal. Sutures in middle of flap to close dead-space shown. C, Healing at 3 weeks showing superficial slough of the pull-through flap. D, Healed reconstruction of the right ear after 6 weeks.
Fig. 6. Complex concha-ear canal defect. A, Design of two flaps for reconstruction of concha and circumferential ear canal defect of the right ear. Superiorly based preauricular flap shown. B, Inset of flaps to reconstruct concha and circumferential canal. Sutures in middle of flap to close dead-space shown. C, Healing at 3 weeks showing superficial slough of the pull-through flap. D, Healed reconstruction of the right ear after 6 weeks.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 7. Management of complex defect with healed result. A, Left ear with medial ear canal and concha defect. B, Design of an inferiorly based preauricular flap for medial canal and a pull-through flap for concha. C, Posterior pull-through flap passed through aperture of the left ear. D, Inset of flaps with absorbable chromic sutures in the left ear. Typical venous congestion of a superiorly based pull-through flap is shown. E, Healed anterior defect of the left ear at 10 weeks. F, Healed postauricular site of flap harvest site behind the left ear.
Fig. 7. Management of complex defect with healed result. A, Left ear with medial ear canal and concha defect. B, Design of an inferiorly based preauricular flap for medial canal and a pull-through flap for concha. C, Posterior pull-through flap passed through aperture of the left ear. D, Inset of flaps with absorbable chromic sutures in the left ear. Typical venous congestion of a superiorly based pull-through flap is shown. E, Healed anterior defect of the left ear at 10 weeks. F, Healed postauricular site of flap harvest site behind the left ear.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1

Metadata

Authors
Gatti, J. E., Charipova, K., & Sollitto, R. B.
Affiliations
  • Virtua Voorhees Hospital (US)
  • Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Gatti, John E.
Venue
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open
Published
2023-10
Volume
11
Issue
10
Pages
e5338
ISSN
2169-7574 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4387571468
Cited by
1
References
5
Citations by year
2024: 1
FWCI
0.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Ear and Head Tumors
Keywords
skin cancer excision, one-stage reconstruction, venous congestion

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