Cited by 4Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesNasal Surgery and Airway Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Application of Drill in Otoplasty: A Technical Modification

Sahin, Caner, Turker, Mesut·2015·Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: Prominent ear is one of the most common congenital deformities in the head and neck region. More than 100 techniques have been described for correction of prominent ears in literature. Mustarde technique is one of the most widely accepted procedures of otoplasty. In our study, we used a surgical method using a drill for correction of prominent ears in combination with the Mustarde technique. Patients with only lack of antihelical fold were included the study. METHODS: Thirty patients were operated on during 2007-2010. The angle of prominent ear from the mastoid tip to the tip of the posterior surface of the auricle was measured preoperatively and postoperatively (3 months after operation) using jib and protractor. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire. RESULTS: The angulation of prominent ear was 45.2 ± 8.6 degrees preoperatively. Postoperatively, the angulation was 25.6 ± 6.3 degrees. The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Fifteen patients (50%) reported that the operation was very satisfactory, 13 patients (43.4%) reported that the operation was satisfactory, and 2 patients (6.6%) reported that the operation was not satisfactory cosmetically. CONCLUSION: The described technique of otoplasty using a drill to thin the auricular cartilage is a safe and easy-to-learn procedure. In Mustarde technique, permanent sutures are used to reshape the cartilage structure in fixed position. Over time, structural strength elasticity of cartilage can weaken the force of sewing forces. Combining the technique with permanent sutures, results were satisfactory. This technique can be used to recreate the antihelical fold. We will follow the cases long term to further show more results.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/scs.0000000000001505

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

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?

  • Sahin and Turker used cartilage thinning with a diamond drill and Mustardé sutures to achieve precise reshaping with low complication rates.

    “Sahin and Turker86 used cartilage thinning with a diamond drill and Mustardé14 sutures to achieve precise reshaping with low complication rates.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sahin, C., & Turker, M.
Venue
Journal of Craniofacial Surgery
Published
2015-05
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
816-819
ISSN
1049-2275 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2403229349
Cited by
4
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2016: 2
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Craniofacial Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics (clinical) › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Keywords
otoplasty, prominent ears, Mustardé technique, auricular cartilage, patient satisfaction, congenital ear deformity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Ear Diseases, Ear, External, Equipment Design, Female, Humans, Male, Mastoid, Otologic Surgical Procedures, Treatment Outcome, Plastic Surgery Procedures, Young Adult

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