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.
Keywords: auricular deformity; congenital ear deformity; ear molding; ear molds.