Helical advancement: pearls and pitfalls.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of acquired auricular defects is a challenging procedure. Since its emergence, the helical advancement technique has proved to be an excellent method of repairing many auricle defects. This technique may occasionally result in an alteration in the dimensions of the neoauricle, with subsequent deformity. However, the advantages of this technique are well known, while the pitfalls are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To critically review the selection criteria of patients with acquired auricular defects to determine which are eligible for helical advancement technique without subsequent deformity. METHODS: From March 2004 to January 2006, 18 patients with three types of upper one-third auricle defects underwent the helical advancement procedure. All patients were male, with mean age of 33.5 years. The defects ranged from 1.2 cm to 4.3 cm in length. Two helical flaps (one on either side of the injury) were advanced along the helical margin to ensure closure. The vertical and horizontal auricular axes were measured before and after surgery, and the actual reduction in millimetres was calculated. Patients were followed up for three months postoperatively. Assessment of the surgical outcome was performed by surgeon (with patient feedback) in the final patient visit. RESULTS: The principle pitfall in the form of small neoauricle with or without cupping was reported in five patients (27.77%). The defects in these cases were >2.8 cm and the mean resultant reduction in vertical axes was >5 mm. Statistical analysis resulted in χ(2)=4.24 and P=0.04. CONCLUSION: The three varieties of upper one-third auricle defects can best be corrected by the helical advancement technique when the defect is <2.8 cm. Furthermore, perioperative reduction in the vertical axis of the neoauricle >5 mm was an important predictive factor in the development of subsequent deformity.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The Antia-Buch flap is a well-known technique for reconstructing chondrocutaneous ear defects involving both skin and cartilage.
“The Antia-Buch flap, introduced in 1967, is a well-known technique for reconstructing chondrocutaneous ear defects, particularly those involving both skin and cartilage.”
From Chondrocutaneous Advancement Flap and Postauricular Skin Flap: An Effective Combination for Large Helical Rim Defect Reconstruction (2025) · cites this paper as [13]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 12
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [9]Brent BD. The acquired auricular deformity. A systematic approach to its analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1977;59:575–85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [13]Benedict M, Pirwitz KU. Plastic external ear reduction in bilateral macrotia. J Laryngol Otol. 2003;1176:487–9. doi: 10.1007/s106-002-8066-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
- Authors
- Al-Shaham, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Baghdad (IQ)
- Corresponding author
- Al-Shaham, AA
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 28-31
- ISSN
- 1195-2199 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3383560
- OpenAlex
- W1522213401
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Plastic Surgery (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
- Keywords
- ear reconstruction, cupping therapy, defect length, patient selection criteria
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