An International Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Clinics

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  16 (2024)
Volume  15 (2023)
Volume  14 (2022)
Volume  13 (2021)
Volume  12 (2020)
Volume  11 (2019)
Volume  10 (2018)
Volume  9 (2017)
Volume  8 (2016)
Volume  7 (2015)
Volume  6 (2014)
Volume  5 (2013)
Volume  4 (2012)
Volume  3 (2011)
Volume  2 (2010)
Volume  1 (2009)
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 ( September-December, 2023 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Single-stage Pinna Reconstruction in Thailand Experience

Jumroon Tungkeeratichai, Navarat Apirakkittikul

Keywords : Medpor implant, Single-stage pinna reconstruction, Temporoparietal fascia flap

Citation Information : Tungkeeratichai J, Apirakkittikul N. Single-stage Pinna Reconstruction in Thailand Experience. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Clin 2023; 15 (3):132-135.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10003-1480

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 09-01-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: Microtia reconstruction is one of the most challenging for the surgeon. In 1970, Brent modified Tanzer's technique and became the foremost expert in microtia reconstruction with a 4-stage procedure. The most popular in Asia is Nagata from Japan, who developed Tanzer's technique with 2-stage procedure. Reinisch has proposed to use porous polyethylene (PPE) (Medpor) in microtia reconstruction, and Romo also reported that using temporoparietal fascial flaps to surround the Medpor implant appears to have significantly reduced its failure. In Thailand, single-stage pinna reconstruction was experienced for more than 10 years, but no systematically demonstrated clinical outcome of this procedure. Objective: To study the clinical success rate and complication of single-stage pinna reconstruction in Thailand experience. Materials and methods: The data were recorded from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2019 from every patient who underwent single-stage microtia reconstruction at Ramathibodi Hospital by a single surgeon (the author). A total of 81 patients were included in this study. Results: Male patients were 50 (62.5%) cases, and female patients were 30 (37.5%) cases. The mean age of the patient was 16 years old (range 1–59 years old). The majority of 78 cases (97.5%) were unilateral microtia reconstruction. About 67 cases (83.75%) underwent single-stage microtia reconstruction successfully without any complications. Only 13 (16.25%) cases had problems and some need solutions. There were 6 cases of early complications and 7 cases of late complications. In the early complication group, there was 1 case of hematoma and 5 cases of implant exposure. In the late complication group, all 7 patients encountered implant exposure problems. Among these patients, 5 patients needed only a single repair, and 2 patients had to undergo multiple surgeries. In our experience since 2009, only 1 patient was necessary to perform removal of prosthesis. Hence, our success rate of a single-stage microtia reconstruction using Medpor prosthesis has been 98.75%. Conclusion: Single-stage microtia reconstruction with porous high-density polyethylene implant is one of the safe and successful techniques to reconstruct microtia problems. The most advantages are that the procedure can be performed in a single procedure at younger age and lower morbidity, compared with costal cartilage uses. However, further study must be performed to decrease complications. In our experience, the successful rate is excellent.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Sclafani AP, Mashkevich G. Aesthetic reconstruction of the auricle. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2006;14(2):103–116. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsc.2006.01.004.
  2. Quatela VC, Thompson SK, Goldman ND. Microtia reconstruction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2006;14(2):117–127. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsc.2006.01.002.
  3. Brent B. Technical advances in ear reconstruction with autogenous rib cartilage grafts: Personal experience with 1200 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;104(2):319–334. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199908000-00001.
  4. Brent B. Microtia repair with rib cartilage grafts: A review of personal experience with 1000 cases. Clin Plast Surg 2002;29(2):257–271. DOI: 10.1016/s0094-1298(01)00013-x.
  5. Tanzer RC. Microtia – A long-term follow-up of 44 reconstructed auricles. Plast Reconstr Surg 1978;61(2):161–166. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-197802000-00001.
  6. Nagata S. A new method of total reconstruction of the auricle for microtia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;92(2):187–201. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199308000-00001.
  7. Nagata S. The modification stages involved in the total reconstruction of the auricle: Part I. The modification in the grafting of the 3D costal cartilage framework (3D frame) for the lobule type microtia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93(2):221–230. PMID: 8310014.
  8. Nagata S. The modification stages involved in the total reconstruction of the auricle: Part II. The modification in the grafting of the 3D costal cartilage framework (3D frame) for the concha type microtia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93(2):231–242. PMID: 8310015.
  9. Nagata S. The modification stages involved in the total reconstruction of the auricle: Part III. The modification in the grafting of the 3D costal cartilage framework (3D frame) for the small concha type microtia. Plast Reconstr Surg 1994;93(2):243–253. PMID: 8310016.
  10. Shanbhag A, Friedman HI, Augustine J, et al. Evaluation of porous polyethylene for external ear reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 1990;24(1):32–39. DOI: 10.1097/00000637-199001000-00006.
  11. Williams JD, Romo T III, Sclafani AP, et al. Porous high-density polyethylene implants in auricular reconstruction. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997;123(6):578–583. DOI: 10.1001/archotol. 1997.01900060020003.
  12. Sclafani AP, Romo T III, Silver L. Clinical and histologic behavior of exposed porous high-density polyethylene implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;99(1):41–50. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199701000-00007.
  13. Reinisch JF, Lewin S. Ear reconstruction using a porous polyethylene framework and temporoparietal fascia flap. Facial Plast Surg 2009;25(3):181–189. DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1239448.
  14. Romo T III, Fozo MS, Sclafani AP. Microtia reconstruction using a porous polyethylene framework. Facial Plast Surg 2000;16(1):15–22. DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-7322.
  15. Romo T III, Reitzen SD. Aesthetic microtia reconstruction with Medpor. Facial Plast Surg 2008;24(1):120–128. DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1037453.
  16. Adams WP Jr, Rohrich RJ, Gunter JP, et al. The rate of warping in irradiated and nonirradiated homograft rib cartilage: A controlled comparison and clinical implications. Plast Reconstr Surg 1999;103(1):265–270. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199901000-00042.
  17. Thomson HG, Kim TY, Ein SH. Residual problems in chestdonor sites after microtia reconstruction: A long-term study. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;95(6):961–968. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199505000-00002.
  18. Ohara K, Nakamura K, Ohta E. Chest wall deformities and thoracic scoliosis after costal cartilage graft harvesting. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;99(4):1030–1036. DOI: 10.1097/00006534-199704000-00017.
  19. Stephan S, Reinisch J. Auricular reconstruction using porous polyethylene implant technique. Facial Plast Surg Clin N Am 2018; 26(1):69–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsc.2017.09.009.
  20. Storck K, Staudenmaier R, Buchberger M, et al. Total reconstruction of the auricle: Our experiences on indications and recent techniques. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:373286.
  21. Braun T, Gratza S, Becker S, et al. Auricular reconstruction with porous polyethylene frameworks: outcome and patient benefit in 65 children and adults Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1201–1212. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ebe391.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.