Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Nov 22;4(2):69-74.
doi: 10.53045/jprs.2024-0017. eCollection 2025 Apr 27.

The Long-term Results of Earfold Implantable Clip for the Correction of Protruding Ears: A Plastic Surgeon's Experience with an Initial 19 Cases

Jasper Pauwels  1 , Bernard Cambier  2
Affiliations

The Long-term Results of Earfold Implantable Clip for the Correction of Protruding Ears: A Plastic Surgeon's Experience with an Initial 19 Cases

Jasper Pauwels et al. J Plast Reconstr Surg. .

Abstract

Objectives: This article reports the long-term results of the minimally invasive Earfold™ device.

Methods: Between May 2017 and January 2021, 19 patients (7 men and 12 women) received an Earfold™ implant. Fifteen patients had bilateral implants placed, and among them, 2 received 2 implants per ear. In 4 cases, placement was limited to one ear. In one patient, a concurrent earlobe correction was performed.

Results: Of the 22 patients assessed with Prefold™, 19 chose for this option instead of surgical otoplasty, 2 chose not to undergo any surgery, and one was not found fit for the procedure by the surgeon. Six patients suffered from a complication and had their implants removed. One additional patient requested to have his implants removed as well.

Conclusions: The Earfold™ implant is a promising, minimally invasive alternative for standard otoplasty treatment. Nevertheless, in our series, a notable high complication rate was observed, often necessitating implant removal, particularly in the long term. Despite recognizing a learning curve, the surgeon in this study chose to discontinue the use of Earfold™ implants.

Keywords: Earfold™; minimally invasive surgery; otoplasty; protruding ears.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
(a) Initial situation before surgery, (b) preoperative assessment using PrefoldTM, (c) 6 weeks after EarfoldTM implant placement.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Two cases of the EarfoldTM implant in which erosion through the overlying skin occurred.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
EarfoldTM implant exposure following traumatic auricular injury.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Baker DC, Converse JM. Correction of protruding ears: a 20-year retrospective. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1979 Dec;3(1):29-39. - PubMed
    1. Nazarian R, Eshraghi AA. Otoplasty for the protruded ear. Semin Plast Surg. 2011 Nov;25(4):288-94. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cooper-Hobson G, Jaffe W. The benefits of otoplasty for children: further evidence to satisfy the modern NHS. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009 Feb;62(2):190-4. - PubMed
    1. Bradbury ET, Hewison J, Timmons MJ. Psychological and social outcome of prominent ear correction in children. Br J Plast Surg. 1992 Feb-Mar;45(2):97-100. - PubMed
    1. Stewart KJ, Lancerotto L. Surgical otoplasty: an evidence-based approach to prominent ears correction. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2018 Feb;26(1):9-18. - PubMed