Pérez GA, Isaac LJ, Mondragón M, Pérez DMR

Language: Spanish
References: 30
Page: 156-162
PDF size: 236.44 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The external ear is a sophisticated structure and of complex morphology. The incidence of auricular deformities is of 1:6000 born. The cause is multiple including genetic alterations and vascular abnormalities during the embryonic morphogenesis. The most frequent clinical presentation is the microtia. The different reconstructive methods has as objective to reproduce the natural reliefs of the ear, by means of having knitted autogenous reconstruction using a rib cartilage framework, alloplastic framework and prosthetic reconstruction with osseointegrated implants. Each method has advantages and disadvantages with results aesthetic different.
Objective: To describe our experience with prosthetic reconstruction with osseointegrated implants in auricular reconstruction.
Patients and Methods: We included to patient with unilateral or bilateral microtia that they went to the consultation of Plastic Surgery among January from the 2002 to December of the 2004. They were evaluated clinically by a multidisciplinary team. The external prosthetic was designed taking the pattern of the normal ear. They was carried out the surgical procedure in 2 times: I - Placement of the osseointegrated implants, II - After 6 months of integration, placement of abutments and fixtures of prosthetic. The pursuit consisted on clinical, radiological evaluations and photographic registrations (before surgery and 6 months after surgery).
Results: 34 patients were included with microtia, 20 of the masculine sex and 14 of the sex, with age 9.5 year-old average. The clinical presentation but it frequents it was unilateral microtia (n=31), not finding difference in the right presentation (n=16) or left (n=15). The time surgical average was of 35 minutes. Complications was not presented. All the patients completed the pursuit, showing appropriate integration of you implant them according to the radiological valuation. The aesthetic result of the prosthetic reconstruction was very satisfactory in all the cases. The pursuit average was of 1.5 years (6-24 months), finding as complication a hypertrophic scar in a patient, which responded to the medical treatment. They were not complications associated to the use of prosthetic reconstruction.
Conclusions: The prosthetic reconstruction with osseointegrated implants is a reconstructive method efficient demonstrating the following advantages: short surgical time, decrease of number of surgeries, absence of complications associated to the area donor, complications surgical minimum or absent, very good aesthetic result.

REFERENCES

1. Aufrich. Total ear reconstruction. PRS 1947; 9: 247.

2. Tánzer, R.C. Microtia. Clin Plastic Surg 1978;5:317.

3. Avelar J.M. A new technique for reconstruction of the auricle in acquired deformities. Ann Plastic Surg 1987;18:5.

4. Nagata S. A new method of total reconstruction of the auricle for microtia. PRS 1993;92:187.

5. Tanzer RC. Total reconstruction of external ear. PRS 1959;23:5.

6. Tanzer RC. Total reconstruction of external ear. The evolution of a plan of treatment. PRS1971;47:523.

7. Burt Brent. Correction of microtia with autogenous cartilage grafts: the classic deformity. PRS 1980;66:1.

8. Burt Brent. Correction of microtia with autogenous cartilage grafts: Atypical/complex deformities. PRS 1980;66:1.

9. Burt Brent. Technical advances ear reconstruction with cartilage grafts. Personal experience 1200 cases. PRS 1999;104:2.

10. Satoru Nagata. Modification of three stages in total reconstruction of the auricle: Part I. Grafting the three dimensional costal cartilage framework for lobule type microtia. PRS 1994;93: 2.

11. Satoru Nagata. Modification of three stages in total reconstruction of the auricle: Part II. Grafting the three dimensional costal cartilage framework for concha type microtia. PRS 1994;93: 2.

12. Satoru Nagata. Modification of three stages in total reconstruction of the auricle: Part III. Grafting the three dimensional costal cartilage framework for Small concha type microtia. PRS 1994;93: 2.

13. Satoru Nagata. Modification of three stages in total reconstruction of the auricle: Part IV. Ear elevation for the constructed auricula. PRS 1994;93:2.

14. Chul Park, D.H. Lew, W.Y. Yoo. An Analysis of 123 Temporoparietal Fascial Flaps: Anatomic and Clinical Considerations in Total Auricular Reconstruction PRS 1999;104:1295-1306 .

15. G.C. Park, J.B. Wiseman, W.D. Clark. Correction of Congenital Microtia Using Stereolithography for Surgical Planning. PRS 2000;105:1444-1447

16. Chul Park. Subfascial Expansion and Expanded Two-Flap Method for Microtia Reconstruction. PRS 2000;106:1473-1487.

17. Chul Park. Balanced Auricular Reconstruction in Dystopic Microtia with the Presence of the External Auditory Canal. PRS 2002;109:1489-1500.

18. Ruyao song, Yeguang Song. The superior auricular artery and retroauricular arterial island flaps. PRS 1996;98:4.

19. Francoise Firmin. Ear reconstruction in cases of typical microtia, experience on 352 corrections. Scand J Plastic Surg 1998;32.

20. Torhu Taeshita, Ichiro Ono. One stage reconstruction of microtia in microform. PRS 1999;103:1.

21. A.M. Danino, S. Yoshimoto, M.D.; M. Ichinose, et al. The Chiba University Chronology for Total Ear Reconstruction. PRS 2000;106:217-237

22. R. L. Walton, E. K. Beahm. Auricular Reconstruction for Microtia: Part II. Surgical Techniques. PRS 2002;110:234-251.

23. Yuiro Hata. Do Not Forget The Fundamental Merits Of Microtia Repair Using A Tissue Expander. PRS 2002;109:819-822.

24. Farkas and Tollety . Anthropometry of the normal and defective ear. Clin Plastic Surg 1990;17(2).

25. E.K. Beahm, R. L. Walton. Auricular Reconstruction for Microtia: Part I. Anatomy, Embryology, and Clinical Evaluation. PRS 2002;109:2473-2482.

26. T.D. Cronin. Use Silastic frame for total and subtotal reconstruction of the external ear: Preliminary report. PRS 1966;37:399.

27. Reinisch J. Microtia reconstruction using a polyethylene implant: an eight year surgical experience. 78th annual Meeting of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons 1999;5.

28. Tjellstrom A. Osseointegrated implants for replacement of absent and defective ears. Clin Plastic Surg 1990;17:355.

29. Wilkes G.H, Wolfaardt JF, Dent M. Osseointegrated alloplastic versus autogenous ear reconstruction: criteria for treatment selection. PRS1994;93:967.

30. C.H. Thorne, L.E. Brecht, M.T. Longaker, et al. Auricular Reconstruction: Indications for Autogenous and Prosthetic Techniques. PRS 2001;107(5):1241-1251.