CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesCongenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies

Long-term follow-up of osseointegrated auricular reconstruction

Korus, Lisa J., Wong, Josh N., Wilkes, Gordon H.·2011·Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
DOI 10.1097/prs.0b013e3181fed595
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Auricular deformity presents a formidable challenge for the reconstructive surgeon, and osseointegrated auricular reconstruction provides a safe and reliable option. The authors sought to review long-term results of osseointegrated auricular reconstruction at the Institute for Reconstructive Sciences in Medicine. METHODS: A chart review examining demographics, skin reactions (defined by a modified Holgers classification), and complications at the Institute for Reconstructive Sciences in Medicine was completed. A multivariate binary linear logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether there was a correlation between the likelihood of a skin reaction and certain patient demographics. A survey was then developed to assess patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Seventy-five osseointegrated auricular reconstructions were performed on 69 patients at the Institute for Reconstructive Sciences in Medicine from 1989 to 2007; mean patient age was 39 years (range, 9 to 76 years). The most common indication for reconstruction was posttraumatic, then congenital and oncologic. The frequency of Holgers reactions was as follows: no reaction, 69 percent; red tissue, 15 percent; excessive tissue, 10 percent; red and moist tissue, 3 percent; granulation tissue, 2 percent; and soft-tissue necrosis, 1 percent. Multivariate binary linear logistic regression analysis found that smoking, younger age, and female gender were associated with the occurrence of a reaction. The overall failure rate of osseointegration in the mastoid region was 2 percent. Survey results found generally satisfied patients willing to undergo the same procedure again, although 55 percent felt that they had had a skin reaction. CONCLUSION: The authors present long-term results showing both success and complications of the osseointegrated prosthetic ear reconstruction for a variety of different etiologies and age groups.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/prs.0b013e3181fed595

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Korus, L. J., Wong, J. N., & Wilkes, G. H.
Affiliations
University of Alberta (CA)
Venue
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2011-02
Volume
127
Issue
2
Pages
630-636
ISSN
0032-1052 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/prs.0b013e3181fed595
OpenAlex
W1971043375
Cited by
34
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
Keywords
ear deformity, skin reactions, osseointegration failure, mastoid region, patient satisfaction, smoking, granulation tissue
MeSH terms
Congenital Abnormalities, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Ear, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Necrosis, Logistic Models, Osseointegration, Patient Satisfaction, Prostheses and Implants, Ear Auricle, Young Adult, Congenital Microtia

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