Ear reconstruction in cases of typical microtia. Personal experience based on 352 microtic ear corrections

TLDR

Microtia reconstruction commonly uses Brent’s four‑stage method or Nagata’s two‑stage approach, the latter incorporating lobule transposition, tragus‑included framework carving, and posterior conchal wall construction. This study reports the author’s experience with 352 microtia reconstructions using Brent’s and Nagata’s techniques and selects typical cases to highlight their advantages and pitfalls. The cohort comprised 184 Brent and 144 Nagata procedures, with 24 atypical cases managed in a single‑stage operation. The analysis demonstrates specific advantages and pitfalls associated with each technique, informing surgical decision‑making.

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to report my experience of 352 ear reconstructions to correct microtia with Brent's technique (n = 184) and Nagata's technique (n = 144). The remaining 24 were atypical presentations reconstructed in a one-stage procedure. Brent's technique is a safe, step-by-step, four-stage reconstruction and Nagata's technique involves only two stages. Nagata's innovations include transposing the lobule of the auricle during the first stage, carving a framework that includes the tragus, and constructing the posterior wall of the concha during the second stage. Cases of typical microtia have been selected to illustrate the advantages and pitfalls of both techniques.