Cited by 7Reconstructive Facial Surgery TechniquesCongenital Ear and Nasal AnomaliesCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments

Porous polyethylene versus autologous costochondral reconstruction for microtia: incidence and analysis of secondary procedures.

Open access
Varagur, Kaamya, Zubovic, Ema, Skolnick, Gary B., Buss, Joanna, Snyder-Warwick, Alison, Reinisch, John, Patel, Kamlesh B.·2024·The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

Abstract

Objective To examine the frequency of autologous and alloplastic ear reconstructions for patients with microtia in the United States, and describe post-index procedure rates associated with each method. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Claims data from 500 + hospitals from IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Multi-State Medicaid databases. Patients/Participants A total of 649 patients aged 1 to 17 years with International Classification of Diseases, ninth/tenth revision (ICD-9/10) diagnoses for microtia, congenital absence of the ear, or hemifacial microsomia. Interventions Alloplastic or autologous ear reconstruction between 2006 and 2018. Main Outcome Measure Post-index procedures performed within 1 year following the index repair, analyzed across the study period and separately for each half of the study period (2006-2012, 2012-2018). Results A total of 486 (75%) qualifying patients received autologous and 163 (25%) received alloplastic reconstruction. Secondary procedure rates were significantly higher in the autologous group at 90 days ( P = .034), 180 days ( P < .001), and at 365 days ( P < .001). Alloplastic reconstruction accounted for 23.2% of reconstructions in the first half of the study period compared with 26.7% in the second half ( P = .319). One-year secondary procedure rates in the autologous group were not significantly different between both halves of the study period (69.7% vs 67.1%, P = .558), but were significantly lower in the second half for the alloplastic group (44.9% vs 20.2%, P = .001). Conclusions In these databases, autologous reconstruction is more common than alloplastic reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction is staged, with most undergoing a secondary procedure between 3 months and 1 year postoperatively. Secondary procedure rates decreased over time in patients undergoing alloplastic reconstruction.

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 · 10.1177/10556656221132034

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Marx H Die Missbildungen des ohres. In: Die Krankheiten Des Gehörorgans. Springer; 1926: 131– 169.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Varagur, K., Zubovic, E., Skolnick, G. B., Buss, J., Snyder-Warwick, A., Reinisch, J., & Patel, K. B.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
  • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Patel, Kamlesh B.
Venue
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Published
2022-10-11
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
365-372
ISSN
  • 1055-6656 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1569
OpenAlex
W4304175889
Cited by
7
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1 TR002345)
  • Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences Just-In-Time grant (720S)
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R24 HS19455)
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
microtia, ear reconstruction, porous polyethylene, alloplastic reconstruction, secondary procedures, hemifacial microsomia, pediatric patients, staged reconstruction
MeSH terms
Humans, Retrospective Studies, United States, Incidence, Porosity, Polyethylene, 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