Skip to main content
Log in

The Cartilage-Sparing Versus the Cartilage-Cutting Technique: A Retrospective Quality Control Comparison of the Francesconi and Converse Otoplasties

  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

From a total of 281 patients with protruding ears who underwent a bilateral otoplasty between 1990 and 2001, a group of 28 (10%) was selected for a retrospective quality control study. The goal was to compare two methods of otoplasty, the Francesconi, a cartilage-sparing technique, and the Converse, a cartilage-cutting technique, in terms of objectively measurable and subjectively discernable differences in results. Objective parameters included measurement of the three cephaloauricular distances and the conchoscapal angle. An independent plastic surgeon performed the evaluation by means of a systematic evaluation system for rating cosmetic surgical procedures and a 5-point visual analog scale for rating satisfaction. The patients’ subjective rate of satisfaction also was investigated using the 5-point scale. The mean medial and inferior cephaloauricular distances were significantly smaller in the Francesconi group. The concoscaphal angle was 90°, or less in all the patients of the Francesconi group, but more than 90° in eight patients (57%) of the Converse group (p = 0.041). Accordingly, the independent surgeon found adequate correction of protrusion in 86% of the Francesconi group and 50% of the Converse group (p = 0.050). His satisfaction rate was significantly in favor of the Francesconi technique (p = 0.006). Not unexpectedly, the patients’ satisfaction rate was comparably high in both groups, and there was no statistical difference between them. In conclusion, the quality control led to a clear preference of the Francesconi over the Converse otoplasty. In addition, the assessment of the postoperative results with the systematic evaluation system offered an excellent information base by which to judge the results of otoplasty. Consequent use of this evaluation system will lead to progress in the surgical procedure.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. B Balogh H Millesi (1992) ArticleTitleAre growth alterations a consequence of surgery for prominent ears? Plast Reconstr Surg 89 623–630 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By2C1cjntlI%3D Occurrence Handle1546073

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. PH Baumgartner (1966) ArticleTitleA technical hint for the correction of prominent ears based on the method of Converse. Plast Reconstr Surg 37 66–68 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CCmD2sjmvFI%3D Occurrence Handle5903221

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. GM Beer I Spicher B Seifert P Kompatscher VE Meyer (2001) ArticleTitleOral premedication for operations in local anesthesia in the face: a placebo-controlled double-blind trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 108 637–643 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00006534-200109010-00006 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD38%2FnsFGgtA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11698834

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. JM Converse A Nigro FA Wilson N Johnson (1955) ArticleTitleA technique for surgical correction of lop ears. Plast Reconstr Surg 15 411–418 Occurrence Handle14384519

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. JM Converse D Wood-Smith (1963) ArticleTitleTechnical details in the surgical correction of the lop ear deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 31 118–128 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CC2B3MvntV0%3D Occurrence Handle14022738

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. MC Ferreira (2000) ArticleTitleEvaluation of results in aesthetic plastic surgery: preliminary observations on mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 106 1630–1638

    Google Scholar 

  7. G Francesconi C Grassi FC Chiocchetti (1982) ArticleTitleLa nostra esperienza nel trattamento chirugico dell’ orecchio ad ansa. Acta Otorhinol Ital 2 163–182 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BiyD1MnjvF0%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. RL Goode SD Proffitt FM Rafaty (1970) ArticleTitleComplication of otoplasty. Arch Otolaryngol 91 352–355 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CS%2BC28%2FgsVI%3D Occurrence Handle4909011

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. J Härtel R Bonitz (1990) ArticleTitleSpätergebnisse von Korrekturoperationen abstehender Ohrmuscheln. Zent bl Chir 115 161–164

    Google Scholar 

  10. P Hyckel S Schumann B Mansel (1990) ArticleTitleMethod of Converse for correction of prominent ears: comparison of results. Acta Chir Plast 32 164–171 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C3sris10%3D Occurrence Handle1704671

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. JC Mustarde (1978) ArticleTitleCorrection of prominent ears using buried mattress sutures. Clin Plast Surg 5 459–464 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CSaD38zos1w%3D Occurrence Handle359224

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. D Pellnitz (1962) ArticleTitleDie Bedeutung von Ohrmuschel-und Nasenwachstum für die Indikation kosmetischer Operationen. Arch Klin Exp Ohren-Nasen-Kehlkopfheilk 180 387–392

    Google Scholar 

  13. S Pilz T Hintringer M Bauer (1995) ArticleTitleOtoplasty using a spherical metal head dermabrador to form a retroauricular furrow: five-years results. Aesth Plast Surg 19 83–91 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqB3cfkvFw%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. RJ Rohrich (2001) ArticleTitleMastering shape and form in cosmetic surgery: the annual meeting of the American Society of Aesthetic Plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 108 741–742 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00006534-200109010-00021 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mnks1ersA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11698849

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. M Spira R McCrea FJ Gerow B Hardy (1969) ArticleTitleCorrection of the principal deformities causing protruding ears. Plast Reconstr Surg 44 150–154 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CCaB2MzmslY%3D Occurrence Handle5799297

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. SJ Stenstrom (1978) ArticleTitleThe Stenstrom otoplasty. Clin Plast Surg 5 465–470 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:CSaD38zos10%3D Occurrence Handle699495

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. E Strasser (1999) ArticleTitleAn objective grading system for the evaluation of cosmetic surgical results. Plast Reconstr Surg 104 2282–2285 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M%2FptlWmug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11149799

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. E Strasser (2002) ArticleTitleApplication of an objective grading system for the evaluation of cosmetic surgical results. Plast Reconstr Surg 109 1733–1740 Occurrence Handle10.1097/00006534-200204150-00042 Occurrence Handle11932628

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. N Weinzweig L Chen WG Sullivan (1994) ArticleTitleHistomorphology of neochondrogenesis after antihelical fold creation: a comparison of three otoplasty techniques in the rabbit. Ann Plast Surg 33 371–376 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqC3cbpvFw%3D Occurrence Handle7810952

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. E Wodak (1967) ArticleTitleÜber die Stellung und Form der menschlichen Ohrmuschel. Arch Klin Exp Ohren-Nasen-Kehlkopfheilk 188 381–386

    Google Scholar 

  21. G Zaoli (1987) Otoplasty. M. Gonzalez-Ulloa JW Meyer R. Smith G Zaoli (Eds) Aesthetic plastic surgery, Vol 2. Piccin Padova 165–297

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gertrude M. Beer M.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kompatscher, P., Schuler, C., Clemens, S. et al. The Cartilage-Sparing Versus the Cartilage-Cutting Technique: A Retrospective Quality Control Comparison of the Francesconi and Converse Otoplasties. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 27, 446–453 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-003-3062-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-003-3062-6

Keywords

Navigation