POSTED UNDER Ear Surgery REVIEWS
Effective and Easy
ORIGINAL POST
Effective and Easy
WORTH IT$2,904
Been wanting less prominent ears for as long as I can remember but I was not willing to go through a proper otoplasty, especially since my defect was not huge.
I did consider having an Ear Fold procedure done but my ears being slightly asymmetric and the Ear Fold being a universal device which cannot be modified, would not have corrected them the way I wished to.
I had anyway a consultation with a surgeon in London whom also explained me that the implants can be often seen under really thin skin (which I sadly have) and that they lately do not implant more than one implant in each ear because of the risks of extra complications.
I then decided to go with the Merck’s method. I had it done by Dr Bern (Dr. Merck’s direct partner) in Konstanz, Germany.
The procedure is pretty painless and does last around two hours. One can check during the procedure if what the doctor is creating is of your liking and ask him eventually to correct more. (which I did for both ears).
The first night is not easy (even if you take that one extra painkiller) but it all gets much better by the next first morning. By then, the pain is EASILY bearable. I could sleep on the second night on my back (I am a back sleeper, so it was not too difficult for me).
I have been taking painkillers for three days only.
After that, I felt I just did not need them any longer.
The ears are swollen and red for around four days. By day five, they were almost back to normal.
You will have tiny scabs for a good month which you are not supposed to touch. No need to go back and check with the doctor. He gives you his phone number anyway shall you have any trouble or emergency. (which I thought was nice considering that the one in London refused to and I would have had to go through his secretaries first shall I have needed anything after the surgery).
The big risk of this surgery is that a thread might pop out (in which case the entire procedure will have to be repeated unfortunately) and that the ears will protrude again, which I really hope will not happen.
Totally worth it for now.
I did consider having an Ear Fold procedure done but my ears being slightly asymmetric and the Ear Fold being a universal device which cannot be modified, would not have corrected them the way I wished to.
I had anyway a consultation with a surgeon in London whom also explained me that the implants can be often seen under really thin skin (which I sadly have) and that they lately do not implant more than one implant in each ear because of the risks of extra complications.
I then decided to go with the Merck’s method. I had it done by Dr Bern (Dr. Merck’s direct partner) in Konstanz, Germany.
The procedure is pretty painless and does last around two hours. One can check during the procedure if what the doctor is creating is of your liking and ask him eventually to correct more. (which I did for both ears).
The first night is not easy (even if you take that one extra painkiller) but it all gets much better by the next first morning. By then, the pain is EASILY bearable. I could sleep on the second night on my back (I am a back sleeper, so it was not too difficult for me).
I have been taking painkillers for three days only.
After that, I felt I just did not need them any longer.
The ears are swollen and red for around four days. By day five, they were almost back to normal.
You will have tiny scabs for a good month which you are not supposed to touch. No need to go back and check with the doctor. He gives you his phone number anyway shall you have any trouble or emergency. (which I thought was nice considering that the one in London refused to and I would have had to go through his secretaries first shall I have needed anything after the surgery).
The big risk of this surgery is that a thread might pop out (in which case the entire procedure will have to be repeated unfortunately) and that the ears will protrude again, which I really hope will not happen.
Totally worth it for now.
cricricri11's provider
Replies (10)
February 22, 2019
Hallo cricricri11
Thank you very much for sharing your experience after an operation with my Merck Stitch Method. I’d like to reassure you that the risk that a thread might pop out is not big. It only happens as an exception in 4 to 5 percent of our operated cases****. In other words, if we operate on 100 patients, this can happen only with 4 or 5 patients****. The exposed thread can then be easily and quickly removed and replaced by a new one. A completely new operation must not be carried out. The tiny scabs can already be removed after one week by softening them with water and then wiping them away with a towel. If one wants to, one can touch them one day after the operation. Should one ear protrude again, it is usually the case of 1 to a maximum of 3 mm. That is why we always recommend an over-correction of 1 to 3 mm, so that no new protruding ear can be seen if the ears should move outwards a little. I wish you much joy with your “new ears”.
Thank you very much for sharing your experience after an operation with my Merck Stitch Method. I’d like to reassure you that the risk that a thread might pop out is not big. It only happens as an exception in 4 to 5 percent of our operated cases****. In other words, if we operate on 100 patients, this can happen only with 4 or 5 patients****. The exposed thread can then be easily and quickly removed and replaced by a new one. A completely new operation must not be carried out. The tiny scabs can already be removed after one week by softening them with water and then wiping them away with a towel. If one wants to, one can touch them one day after the operation. Should one ear protrude again, it is usually the case of 1 to a maximum of 3 mm. That is why we always recommend an over-correction of 1 to 3 mm, so that no new protruding ear can be seen if the ears should move outwards a little. I wish you much joy with your “new ears”.
February 25, 2019
Thank you very much Dr Merck. Is there a way to try to avoid at all costs the 1 to 3 mm possible recurring protrusion? Would sleeping solely on my back a good idea? I am trying not to touch my ears as much as possible; and i am using a very low pillow. I am very impressed by the low levels of pain i have experienced so far. I was ready not to sleep for at least a couple of weeks but it has been the case over just a couple of nights :)
February 22, 2019
Hallo cricricri11
It was a correct decision that you did not choose the earfold method. Here are the reasons:
The Earfold Method has numerous disadvantages compared to the Stitch Method:
The EarFold Method is not minimally invasive like the Merck Stitch Method as the skin of the ear is raised from the cartilage approximately 1 cm in width and 2.5 cm in length to create a pocket for the Earfold implant (see video http://links.lww.com/PRSGO/A639). This is done several times depending on the number of implants to be inserted. There is thus the risk of developing haematomas and infection. With the stitch method, the skin of the ear is not raised from the cartilage anywhere. The only wounds are the stitch points of a tiny needle on both sides of the ear, and two to three stab incisions of merely 2-3 mm in length on the back of the ear.
Incisions of up to 1 cm in length are made on the front side of the ear to insert the metal implants. Such incisions are not made with the Merck Stitch Method.
The plastic surgeon Dr. Norbert Kang from London reports that after operating on slightly more than 400 patients with the Earfold Method, there is only a permanent effect with Earfold if it is combined with a cartilage-weakening procedure involving scoring or needle perforations through the cartilage several times. This means reverting to the invasive traditional methods and should be banned from ear surgery.
These incisions on the front of the ear can leave behind visible scars, particularly when there is a predisposition to form hypertrophic scars, or even keloids (excessive and conspicuous scar development which is difficult to remove).
The metal implants can shift position when one lies on the ears in the first weeks after the operation and affect the pinning result. With the Merck Stitch Method, the position of the ears does not change if one lies on them as the threads can’t change their position.
The Earfold Method can’t correct all causes of a protruding ear. If there is a large cavum conchae (big bowl-shaped cavity before the ear canal entrance), which often leads to a protruding ear in the middle third, the ear can’t be adequately pinned in this area with the metal implants. In comparison, this is easily possible with the Merck Stitch Method by a so-called medialisation of the antihelix, namely with threads only, without incisions and without removal of any cartilage.
The patient only learns during the examination of his ears whether the Earfold Method is suitable for him. In comparison, the Stitch Method is suitable for all protruding ears and thus no patient is sent home again with the finding that the operation is not suitable for him. With the Stitch Method, the patient demonstrates the desired distance of his ears in a mirror before the operation, he also receives this distance, and can check and co-determine this in a hand-held mirror during and at the end of the operation. Each individual head-to-ear distance desired by the patient is possible. This is because the threads are inserted along the whole ear and each new, desired position can be obtained by tightening the threads to varying degrees.
A prominent Antihelix fold of the ear, which is often considered to be cosmetically disturbing, is even more strongly pronounced with the Earfold implant and cannot be corrected. The Stitch Method, in contrast, can sink a prominent antihelix fold by a special positioning of the threads.
If a patient is not satisfied with the result of the Earfold Method, it is pointed out that the only remaining alternative is the traditional ear pinning operation, which sometimes requires a general anaesthestic. This assertion is not correct as there is no mention of the Stitch Method whereby ears can be pinned even less invasively and under local anaesthetic from the age of 12.
As the skin on the front of the ear is significantly thinner than on the back of the ear and the implants are positioned on the front of the ear, the implants can be visible through the thin skin. If the implant shifts or turns, its edges and corners will become visible. The implants must therefore be removed. We can pin the ears of such patients again with our Stitch Method only after the removal of the Earfold implants.
The Earfold implants have small tines with which they grip the cartilage. The tines damage the surface of the cartilage if an implant has to be removed after a long period.
Permanent sensitivity disturbances of the ears can occur with the Earfold Method. These don’t occur with the Stitch Method.
There is still no publication on the long-term results of the Earfold Method as it has only been in use for a short time. With the Merck Stitch Method, there are, in the meantime, long-term results of 20 years on more than 11.000 successfully operated ears and the results have been published. There is only a very limited period of experience to date with the Earfold Method.
If there is a complication in the form of an infection or rejection of the implant after the utilization of the Earfold Method, the correction possibilities are difficult and not very promising. In such a case, the metal implant must be removed until healing is complete. The same prepared pocket, in which the metal implant lies, can no longer be used because of adhesions and scarring of the thin skin on the front of the ear. The skin would otherwise tear at this place. New pockets must be created in another part of the skin for a renewed correction at a later date, or one must resort to another method.
The EarFold Method is not, as occasionally claimed, less painful than the Stitch Method.
When the sun shines through the ear from behind, one can detect the metal part as a dark shadow. The threads of the Stitch Method can’t be seen like this.
To avoid pressure on the ears, it is recommended to sleep on the back for approximately 4 weeks with the Earfold Method. With the Stitch Method, the patient is allowed to sleep on his ears right after the operation.
With the Earfold Method, the patient should not swim for roughly 4 weeks if possible, nor play any contact sports, so that the implants can settle. With the Stitch Method, one can already swim and play contact sports 10 days after the operation. One is only advised against professional wrestling.
With the Earfold Method, one is advised against wearing earrings for about 2 weeks to decrease the risk of infection. With the Stitch Method, earrings may be worn again immediately at the end of the operation.
With the Earfold Method, one is advised not to smoke for about 3 months if possible as nicotine decreases the flow of blood to the ear, which greatly increases the risk of complications. This also applies to e-cigarettes, nicotine plasters or chewing gum. There are absolutely no such restrictions with the Stitch Method.
The Earfold Method is offered from the age of 7 years. The Stitch Method can be used earlier, namely from 5 years of age and thus in time for the first day of school, which is important to avoid teasing.
With the Earfold Method, it is mentioned that irregularities can occur in the ear. It has also happened that the upper part of the antihelix is not naturally curved forward but is rather too vertical, thereby creating an upper pointy, so-called Spock Ear. (see the publication by Kang and Kerstein from the year 2016 in the Aesthetic Surgery Journal). Irregularities, including the Spock Ear, do not occur with the Stitch Method.
It is pointed out that when the Earfold implants have been in the ears for 2 to 3 years, the ears will stay in their new position when the implants are removed. That is false. The implants must remain in the ear for a minimum of 10 years for the ear cartilage to remain reshaped.
In the publication mentioned below, an examination of 403 operated patients revealed that skin necrosis (erosion of the skin) over the implants occurred in 3 to 4 percent of the cases with the Earfold Method. This is not possible with the Stitch Method and has therefore never occurred.
If an implant has to be removed, it is considerably more complex and difficult than if a thread has to be removed with the Stitch Method.
There are now many surgeons performing the Earfold Method, meaning that there is only a small number of operated patients per surgeon. The surgeons can acquire only a little experience and thus do not know the possible complications of the method from their own experience. In a publication by Kang et al from 2018 in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Journal, in which 403 operated patients with the Earfold Method were assessed over a period of 30 to 48 months post-operatively, 9.7% of the patients required a renewed intervention due to adverse effects, including skin erosion over the implants (3.7%), and infection (1.7%). It must be taken into consideration that the observation period was short and further complications that could have occurred later were not documented. More than 11,000 protruding ears have been successfully pinned in the last 18 years with the Stitch Method, thereby guaranteeing adequate experience. Only a few complications were observed with the Stitch Method that were not dangerous and were treatable. These are mentioned on our website.
It was a correct decision that you did not choose the earfold method. Here are the reasons:
The Earfold Method has numerous disadvantages compared to the Stitch Method:
The EarFold Method is not minimally invasive like the Merck Stitch Method as the skin of the ear is raised from the cartilage approximately 1 cm in width and 2.5 cm in length to create a pocket for the Earfold implant (see video http://links.lww.com/PRSGO/A639). This is done several times depending on the number of implants to be inserted. There is thus the risk of developing haematomas and infection. With the stitch method, the skin of the ear is not raised from the cartilage anywhere. The only wounds are the stitch points of a tiny needle on both sides of the ear, and two to three stab incisions of merely 2-3 mm in length on the back of the ear.
Incisions of up to 1 cm in length are made on the front side of the ear to insert the metal implants. Such incisions are not made with the Merck Stitch Method.
The plastic surgeon Dr. Norbert Kang from London reports that after operating on slightly more than 400 patients with the Earfold Method, there is only a permanent effect with Earfold if it is combined with a cartilage-weakening procedure involving scoring or needle perforations through the cartilage several times. This means reverting to the invasive traditional methods and should be banned from ear surgery.
These incisions on the front of the ear can leave behind visible scars, particularly when there is a predisposition to form hypertrophic scars, or even keloids (excessive and conspicuous scar development which is difficult to remove).
The metal implants can shift position when one lies on the ears in the first weeks after the operation and affect the pinning result. With the Merck Stitch Method, the position of the ears does not change if one lies on them as the threads can’t change their position.
The Earfold Method can’t correct all causes of a protruding ear. If there is a large cavum conchae (big bowl-shaped cavity before the ear canal entrance), which often leads to a protruding ear in the middle third, the ear can’t be adequately pinned in this area with the metal implants. In comparison, this is easily possible with the Merck Stitch Method by a so-called medialisation of the antihelix, namely with threads only, without incisions and without removal of any cartilage.
The patient only learns during the examination of his ears whether the Earfold Method is suitable for him. In comparison, the Stitch Method is suitable for all protruding ears and thus no patient is sent home again with the finding that the operation is not suitable for him. With the Stitch Method, the patient demonstrates the desired distance of his ears in a mirror before the operation, he also receives this distance, and can check and co-determine this in a hand-held mirror during and at the end of the operation. Each individual head-to-ear distance desired by the patient is possible. This is because the threads are inserted along the whole ear and each new, desired position can be obtained by tightening the threads to varying degrees.
A prominent Antihelix fold of the ear, which is often considered to be cosmetically disturbing, is even more strongly pronounced with the Earfold implant and cannot be corrected. The Stitch Method, in contrast, can sink a prominent antihelix fold by a special positioning of the threads.
If a patient is not satisfied with the result of the Earfold Method, it is pointed out that the only remaining alternative is the traditional ear pinning operation, which sometimes requires a general anaesthestic. This assertion is not correct as there is no mention of the Stitch Method whereby ears can be pinned even less invasively and under local anaesthetic from the age of 12.
As the skin on the front of the ear is significantly thinner than on the back of the ear and the implants are positioned on the front of the ear, the implants can be visible through the thin skin. If the implant shifts or turns, its edges and corners will become visible. The implants must therefore be removed. We can pin the ears of such patients again with our Stitch Method only after the removal of the Earfold implants.
The Earfold implants have small tines with which they grip the cartilage. The tines damage the surface of the cartilage if an implant has to be removed after a long period.
Permanent sensitivity disturbances of the ears can occur with the Earfold Method. These don’t occur with the Stitch Method.
There is still no publication on the long-term results of the Earfold Method as it has only been in use for a short time. With the Merck Stitch Method, there are, in the meantime, long-term results of 20 years on more than 11.000 successfully operated ears and the results have been published. There is only a very limited period of experience to date with the Earfold Method.
If there is a complication in the form of an infection or rejection of the implant after the utilization of the Earfold Method, the correction possibilities are difficult and not very promising. In such a case, the metal implant must be removed until healing is complete. The same prepared pocket, in which the metal implant lies, can no longer be used because of adhesions and scarring of the thin skin on the front of the ear. The skin would otherwise tear at this place. New pockets must be created in another part of the skin for a renewed correction at a later date, or one must resort to another method.
The EarFold Method is not, as occasionally claimed, less painful than the Stitch Method.
When the sun shines through the ear from behind, one can detect the metal part as a dark shadow. The threads of the Stitch Method can’t be seen like this.
To avoid pressure on the ears, it is recommended to sleep on the back for approximately 4 weeks with the Earfold Method. With the Stitch Method, the patient is allowed to sleep on his ears right after the operation.
With the Earfold Method, the patient should not swim for roughly 4 weeks if possible, nor play any contact sports, so that the implants can settle. With the Stitch Method, one can already swim and play contact sports 10 days after the operation. One is only advised against professional wrestling.
With the Earfold Method, one is advised against wearing earrings for about 2 weeks to decrease the risk of infection. With the Stitch Method, earrings may be worn again immediately at the end of the operation.
With the Earfold Method, one is advised not to smoke for about 3 months if possible as nicotine decreases the flow of blood to the ear, which greatly increases the risk of complications. This also applies to e-cigarettes, nicotine plasters or chewing gum. There are absolutely no such restrictions with the Stitch Method.
The Earfold Method is offered from the age of 7 years. The Stitch Method can be used earlier, namely from 5 years of age and thus in time for the first day of school, which is important to avoid teasing.
With the Earfold Method, it is mentioned that irregularities can occur in the ear. It has also happened that the upper part of the antihelix is not naturally curved forward but is rather too vertical, thereby creating an upper pointy, so-called Spock Ear. (see the publication by Kang and Kerstein from the year 2016 in the Aesthetic Surgery Journal). Irregularities, including the Spock Ear, do not occur with the Stitch Method.
It is pointed out that when the Earfold implants have been in the ears for 2 to 3 years, the ears will stay in their new position when the implants are removed. That is false. The implants must remain in the ear for a minimum of 10 years for the ear cartilage to remain reshaped.
In the publication mentioned below, an examination of 403 operated patients revealed that skin necrosis (erosion of the skin) over the implants occurred in 3 to 4 percent of the cases with the Earfold Method. This is not possible with the Stitch Method and has therefore never occurred.
If an implant has to be removed, it is considerably more complex and difficult than if a thread has to be removed with the Stitch Method.
There are now many surgeons performing the Earfold Method, meaning that there is only a small number of operated patients per surgeon. The surgeons can acquire only a little experience and thus do not know the possible complications of the method from their own experience. In a publication by Kang et al from 2018 in the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Journal, in which 403 operated patients with the Earfold Method were assessed over a period of 30 to 48 months post-operatively, 9.7% of the patients required a renewed intervention due to adverse effects, including skin erosion over the implants (3.7%), and infection (1.7%). It must be taken into consideration that the observation period was short and further complications that could have occurred later were not documented. More than 11,000 protruding ears have been successfully pinned in the last 18 years with the Stitch Method, thereby guaranteeing adequate experience. Only a few complications were observed with the Stitch Method that were not dangerous and were treatable. These are mentioned on our website.
February 25, 2019
I was very scared of the possible erosion of the skin being mine so very thin. Funnily enough , this was sort of acknowledged by the surgeon i had the consultation with in London. Thank you.
May 27, 2019
Hi and thanks for your share. Did you decrease also the size of your ears ? Wish ou a nice day
May 27, 2019
hey Destiny, not at all but the fact they are now closer to my head, makes them look somehow smaller ;)))))
UPDATED FROM cricricri11
2 months post
2 months
Two months update ; it really was an easy recovery. Sleeping was a little annoying towards the very beginning but honestly nothing major at all.
I had a little pain for around a week approximately three weeks ago and I think it was caused by the temporary stiches sticking to the scabs too tightly and I felt some weird sharp pain when moving around.
The surgeon suggested to go and had them removed but I could not find a doctor available and I did just patiently wait.
It took almost two months to get rid of them (but they were behind the ears, hence not visible).
As the doctor mentioned up here, the 2mm did “happen” and my ears are now sticking out a little more compared to day one. Consider over correction shall you go for the procedure. I should have since what I had to correct was already minor in the first place.
No thread sticking out so far, so fingers crossed.
I had a little pain for around a week approximately three weeks ago and I think it was caused by the temporary stiches sticking to the scabs too tightly and I felt some weird sharp pain when moving around.
The surgeon suggested to go and had them removed but I could not find a doctor available and I did just patiently wait.
It took almost two months to get rid of them (but they were behind the ears, hence not visible).
As the doctor mentioned up here, the 2mm did “happen” and my ears are now sticking out a little more compared to day one. Consider over correction shall you go for the procedure. I should have since what I had to correct was already minor in the first place.
No thread sticking out so far, so fingers crossed.
Replies (12)
May 25, 2019
Thanks for sharing your experience with us. Are you still happy with your ears now?
May 25, 2019
I am even if they did stick out a little again; i obviously notice it straight away because my correction was minimal. But i guess the op took away what really did bug me about them. Also, two months later and i am absolutely pain free, even during the night :)
May 27, 2019
Brilliant, thank you for getting back to me. Will consider over correction if I do go ahead then. Just a case of deciding now!
May 26, 2019
Hello, I think your results are really good. I myself am having considering done. And I am debating between Dr. Greg's Earstich method or Dr. Merck's Stitch Method. I would really appreciate if you could help me out. My main issue is that my ears mainly stick on the upper part quite a lot. So basically would like to bring them closer to my head and make them more natural looking. Im open to travelling to Germany or London to have the procedure done. So your help would be really appreciated.
May 26, 2019
I have had a Skype consultation with Dr Greg O Toole (which did cost 250 pounds thou :/ ) and the main thing he recommended was not to use two on each ear (they did it at the beginning but apparently the possibility of complications is much higher when you use two >four). If yours only stick out on top , you might be ok with one. I also thought that mines did only stick out on the upper part but Dr Bern also did work towards the middle. So i wonder if only working towards the upper pole would have given the same result. My main problem with the Earfold is that you cannot really "personalize" it. It is a one size fits all method! Which they can do instead with threads. Isn't anyone offering a free earfold consultation where you are?
May 26, 2019
I am sorry, you wrote Earstich method, not Earfold. Oh dear , lol ;) I am not really sure what the difference between the two is to be totally honest .
May 28, 2019
Thanks for your reply. Nope no one here is offereing Ear Fold. So I am debating between Dr. Merck and Dr. Greg like I mentioned. Mr. Merck and Dr. Greg both do the stitch method. I want to go as minimally invasive as possible, least scarring and downtime. However, permanent results like you do. Overall, could please, family members etc, notice you had got them done. Also, Does Dr. Merck's clinic specialize in only this? Have you spoke to anyone who has gotten the stitch method done by Mr. Greg?
May 28, 2019
When you say "Dr Greg", do you mean Greg OToole? If you do , i honestly could not understand if there is much difference between the two methods. Dr Merck describes his method and differentiate it from the "normal" stitch method that has been used in the past (the one i believe Dr Otoole uses), but i honestly could not bring myself to understand in which way. I have not discussed to anyone else that went through this method i am afraid. My family members noticed because i told them, but no one else ;). By the way, be aware that the dr Otoole stitch method is more expensive (there was a thread here of a lady whom went through it a few years ago) and you might need a following to the surgery, which you do not with Dr Merck's
UPDATED FROM cricricri11
4 months post
ARGH
Well, not going super great here. My left ear decided to stick nicely out again in the past couple of weeks. It is still not the way it was before the surgery, but considering that my correction was minimal, it is pretty annoying. Also, i have a weird bump on the upper part of the right ear (probably a thread knot under the skin) which is sticking out quite a lot and I am very scared it will "pop" out. I wrote them an email and see what sort of post operative support is provided.
Replies (14)
June 6, 2019
PS: a correction is possible if needed and it would cost 180e (Dr Merck’s secretary PROMPTLY answered my email) . I will wait a few more months and decide what to do .
September 6, 2019
Hi, any updates? Did you decide on a correction? Thanks.
September 7, 2019
i am not going to do it for now; i will leave it all for a year and then decide what to do. I believe that in one year the results will be definitive and i will be able to decide if I shall re touch the left ear or not. I wrote them an email and they were really understanding.
May 30, 2020
They seem to want their patients to be happy, and to help any way they can.I know how important it is to have your ears how you wish them to be.
September 13, 2024
Hello, what did you do in the end with your ears? Do you get the ear retouched/ do you still have the threads in? I am considering getting the Ear Stitch at Dr Merck’s clinic but I am concerned after seeing reviews like this, so would appreciate your honest advice as to whether or not it is worth it? Thank you so much!!
March 24, 2021
Just one comment from my side, after 1-2 years skin has eroded more and more and Earfold implants poped up and had to be extracted (from the upper part of the ears). This is my experience. Just keep in mind, that this might happened.
March 24, 2021
Weirdly enough , that was the reason why I did decide not to go for the Earfolds. I have extremely thin skin and I was so scared that might have happened. Having said that, I am not super happy of the method I went to. One ear should be redone and the other is anyway always painful. Especially now that we have to use masks. I can never use one by fixing the elastics/bands behind my ears. I have to get those that go all around the head or a plastic support. Extremely annoying :/
March 24, 2021
:) thank you , will not re do it for now anyway. Will you do something else or just leave your ears as they are?
September 26, 2021
The good thing is they want to fix it for you, that's really important, rest is up to you to decide. I guess it's a good thing the surgery is fully reversible if you decided to remove threads and try a different method, but I prefer the non evasive method, traditional otoplasty surgery is far more complicated to fix than your issue.
November 11, 2021
Hi, I just had my ears done like a week ago, but I am not really happy how they turned out, as they are now really flat and hurt pretty badly. For how long is it possible to take all the threads out (I had 4 on my right side and 3 on my left side) for ear to just pop back into place? Thinking about doing that and then have surgery with the basic method (I know a wonderful surgeon). Would be nice if you have an answer :)
September 13, 2024
Hello, did you end up having the threads removed? I am considering having the Ear Stitch at Dr Merck’s clinic and would really appreciate your honest opinion on whether you think it is worth it or not?? Thank you!
October 3, 2024
Hey, I hope you are doing well, how did it go for you after 5 years, am really interested to know as am considering it too
Thanks for sharing your photos! 83% of RealSelf Community Members said that before and after photos were the most important thing when choosing a provider.