Neonatal ear splinting for congenital ear deformities✰

Ear Molding in Children-Timing, Technique, and Follow-up: A Systematic Review

Background: Nonsurgical management of congenital ear anomalies using molding devices shows efficacy but lacks standardization of treatment protocols and outcome measures. Learning Objective: To compare ear molding techniques and identify factors related to treatment outcomes. Design Type: Systematic review of the literature (1990-2021). Methods: Studies reporting molding for congenital ear anomalies were assessed. PRISMA guidelines were used. Data extracted included: age at treatment initiation, treatment duration, correction rates, and complications. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and outcomes were compared using the Student t-test. Results: In total, 37 studies with 3,341 patients (mean patients per study, 95; range, 5-488) were included. Infants in whom treatment was initiated at 4.8 weeks (median, 3.7; range, 0.9-8.8 weeks) were treated for 5.1 weeks (median 4.7, range 2.6-7.6 weeks) with 11.0 months follow-up (median 11.4, range 1.4-21.0 months). Individualized devices (physician-customized) were used more (62.2% of studies) than commercial devices. No difference in correction (p = 0.44) or complication rates (p = 0.19) was identified between devices. Totally, 70.3% of studies reported complications and 40.5% of studies included long-term follow-up data. Conclusions: The available evidence supports initiating ear molding in the first weeks of life to be most effective, yet outcome data should be standardized in future studies to improve evidence quality.

Efficacy of Classic Ear Molding for Neonatal Ear Deformity: Case Series and Literature Review

Background: We analyzed an original case series of the classic ear-molding method and evaluated the efficacy and complication rate of the method compared to commercial ear-molding products by meta-analysis to draw conclusions on the efficacy of the classic method. Methods: From January 2019 to March 2022, we selected patients who underwent classic ear molding for newborn ear deformities at our institution and reviewed the patient age, treatment time, efficiency and complications. Additionally, the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched, and meta-analysis (following the PRISMA guidelines) was performed. Results: In the case study, the success rate (excellent and good outcomes) of the classic ear-molding method was 92.6%. The mean age at application and mean duration of application were 5.81 ± 6.09 days and 32.13 ± 7.90 days, respectively. In the systematic review, the classic method group showed a statistically smaller success rate (proportion of 0.79) and statistically smaller complication rate (proportion of 0.05) than the commercial product group (proportion of 0.83). Conclusions: Compared with commercial products, classic ear molding has remarkable and comparable therapeutic effects on neonatal auricular deformities. Additionally, the classic ear-molding method is more suitable for infants with auricular deformities from socioeconomically vulnerable areas. Thus, the classic ear-molding method could be a better option for congenital ear anomalies than commercial ear-molding products.