Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Otoplasty: Rasps or Puncture Needles? A Clinical Trial

  • Original Article
  • Facial surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Up to 25% of otoplasties can lead to complications, indicating the need for technical refinement. Stenström’s anterior auricular cartilage scoring is used in combination with Mustardé’s technique to treat the antihelix deformity in several series, with good results. Both can be performed with different instruments such as rasps or puncture needles.

Objectives

This study aims to compare the use of puncture needles and rasps for anterior cartilage scoring in otoplasty. The association of Stenström and Mustardé were the basic technique. Anatomical and aesthetic endpoints were assessed. We also reviewed postoperative complications.

Methods

Forty-two patients with prominent ears and no previous surgery were randomly assigned needle or rasps technique. They were operated on by the first-year plastic surgery resident in the years of 2014 and 2019. The patients were followed up and reviewed at days 2 and 15, as well as 1, 3 and 6 months postoperatively. The endpoints were evaluated through pre- and postoperative photographs by four experienced plastic surgeons unaware of the techniques used in each case. Patient satisfaction was searched by a “yes” or “no” question. Surgical time and postoperative edema were evaluated in 20 patients (2014 group).

Results

There were no statistical differences between the groups in terms of overall results, symmetry, antihelix shape or cartilage fracture. Ninety-five percent of the patients were satisfied with the outcome. The needle technique resulted in less postoperative edema and shorter surgical time.

Conclusion

Anterior cartilage scoring used in combination with posterior mattress sutures to treat poorly formed antihelical fold has good and similar results when performed with rasps or puncture needles, even in unexperienced hands. The needle has the advantage of leading to a comparable surgical time and less postoperative edema, while not requiring any special surgical instrument.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the table of contents or the online instructions to authors www.springer.com/00266.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mascio D, Castagnetti F, Baldassarre S (2004) Otoplasty: anterior abrasion of ear cartilage with dermabrader. Aesth Plast Surg 27:466–471

    Google Scholar 

  2. Caouette-Laberge L1, Guay N, Bortoluzzi P, Belleville C (2000) Anterior scoring technique and results in 500 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200002000-00004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaye BL (1973) A simplified method for correcting the prominent ear. PRS 52:184

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Nevarre DR, Maloney C, Wolfort FG (2000) Endoscopic carpal tunnel release instruments used for auricular cartilage scoring and correcting a flattened antihelix. PRS 106:1214–1215

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mahler D (1986) The correction of the prominent ear. Aesthet Plast Surg 10:29–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bradbury ET, Hewison J, Timmons MJ (1992) Psychological and social outcome of prominent ear correction in children. Br J Plast Surg 45:97–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Yugueros P, Friedland JA, Furnas DW (2001) Otoplasty: the experience of 100 consecutive patients. PRS 108:1052–1053

    Google Scholar 

  8. Luis Fernando Ungarelli(2012) Eficácia do retalho adipofascial retroauricular em otoplastia. Rev Bras Cir Plást 27(2) São Paulo

  9. Stenström S (1963) A “natural” technique for correction of congenitally prominent ears. Plast Reconstr Surg 32:509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gibson T, Davis W (1958) The distortion of autogenous cartilage grafts: its cause and prevention. Br J Plast Surg 10:257–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Thomas SS, Fatah F (2001) Closed anterior scoring for prominent-ear correction revisited. Br J Plast Surg 54(7):581–587

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Chongchet V (1963) A method of antihelix reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 16:268–272

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Miguel Marques Oliveira; Daniel de Sousa Marques Oliveira; Gustavo de Sousa Marques Oliveira (2013) Otoplastia estética com emprego de agulha de crochê. Rev Bras Cir Plást 28(2) São Paulo

  14. Vecchione TR (1979) Needle scoring of the anterior surface of the cartilage in otoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 64(4):568

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bulstrode NW, Huang S, Martin DL (2003) Otoplasty by percutaneous anterior scoring. Another twist to the story: a longterm study of 114 patients. Br J Plast Surg 56:145–149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stenström SJ, Heftner J (1978) The Stenström otoplasty. Clin Plast Surg 5:465–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mustardé JC (1963) The correction of prominent ear using simple matress sutures. Br J Plast Surg 16:170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gantous A, Tasman A, Neves J (2018) Management of the Prominent Ear. Fac Plast Surg Clin North America 26(2):181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smittenberg M, Marsman M, Veeger N, Moues C (2018) Comparison of Cartilage-Scoring and Cartilage-Sparing Otoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 141(4):500e–506e

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hafiz R, Philandrianos C, Casanova D, Chossegros C, Bertrand B (2016) Technical refinement of Stenström otoplasty procedure. Revue de Stomatologie, de Chirurgie Maxillo-faciale et de Chirurgie Orale 117(3):147–150

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mazeed AS, Bulstrode NW (2019) Refinements in otoplasty surgery: experience of 200 consecutive cases using cartilage-sparing technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 144(1):72–80

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Webster GV (1969) The tail of the helix as a key to otoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 44:455

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Plastic Surgery, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, 2350, Ramiro Barcelos st, Porto Alegre-RS, 90035-007, Brazil

    Eduardo Madalosso Zanin, João Maximiliano, Antônio Carlos Pinto Oliveira, Daniele Walter Duarte & Ciro Paz Portinho

  2. Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Sul Medical School, Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil

    Nícolas Endrigo Arpini

  3. Head of the Plastic Surgery Division, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil

    Marcus Vinicius Martins Collares

Authors
  1. Eduardo Madalosso Zanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. João Maximiliano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antônio Carlos Pinto Oliveira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nícolas Endrigo Arpini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniele Walter Duarte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ciro Paz Portinho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Marcus Vinicius Martins Collares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduardo Madalosso Zanin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

All study participants gave written informed consent, institutional review board approval was granted, and the study was conducted following the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (MOV 160226 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zanin, E.M., Maximiliano, J., Oliveira, A.C.P. et al. Otoplasty: Rasps or Puncture Needles? A Clinical Trial. Aesth Plast Surg 45, 521–527 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01972-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01972-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation