Sculpo Repair: Linear Closure With Cartilage Sculpting for Helical Rim Defects ≤ 2.5 cm²
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Helical-rim reconstruction is limited by rigid cartilage and minimal laxity. Linear repair may be used for defects <1.5 cm², whereas larger wounds require flaps that increase complication risk; data on simple linear closure with cartilage sculpting are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate cosmetic outcomes and complications of linear closure with cartilage sculpting for helical rim defects ≤2.5 cm². METHODS: Fifteen patients with helical rim defects underwent Mohs micrographic surgery followed by cartilage trimming and primary complex closure. Complications were assessed at suture removal (7-10 days). At ≥ 3 months, scars were evaluated by 2 blinded dermatologic surgeons using the SCAR scale, and patients completed the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). RESULTS: No infections or hematomas occurred, and one dehiscence (6.7%) was reported. Among 30 SCAR ratings, scar spread was none/pencil-thin in 26 (86.7%), erythema absent/light-pink in 29 (96.7%), track marks absent in 29 (96.7%), and overall appearance "desirable" in 27 (90.0%). The mean POSAS score was 8.3 ± 3.6/60; the mean overall satisfaction was 1.1 ± 0.3/10 (lower = better). CONCLUSION: Linear closure with limited cartilage trimming yields excellent cosmesis and minimal complications for helical rim defects up to 2.5 cm².
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Sculpo Repair: Linear Closure With Cartilage Sculpting for Helical Rim Defects ≤ 2.5 cm²
- Date Crossref
- 18/03/2026
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.