LEARN, SHOP & CHAT ABOUT PLASTIC SURGERY, BEAUTY AND ANTI-AGING
You're here: Home > Message Boards > Plastic Surgery > Otoplasty, Ear Surgery

Plastic Surgery, Beauty, Skin Care Message Boards & Blogs

Our message boards are for all of us who want to talk, listen, share, and support fellow women and men interested in discussing plastic surgery, beauty treatments, pregnancy, gynecological concerns, aging, and various health conditions. You can read messages without logging in. To post a message, please log in or register. It's free...and being a member gives you access to important information. By using the Message Boards, you agree to the Message Boards Policies.

SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to get newsletter with weekly popular topics discussed on the boards  
 

dr merck method

Re: dr merck method

Postby MissJ521@aol.com » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:21 pm

Servus!, Dr. Merck,

Comments:

You might want to edit your post of the 2 duplicates of the first abstract so that just one abstract appears in your post.

As to whether or not your technique was the "first" minimally invasive one via a closed technique (External Mustarde Technique), I think it would depend on whether or not another doc doing EMT had a prior publication.

The Abstract would benefit by organizing into sections such as:

"Background", "Method" , "Results", "Conclusions"

I would think the editor would want to know the methodology used (type of statistical observation) used to assess the results and also come to your conclusions.

Although your conclusion is that it has "shown to be an alternative to all open and closed methods previously used", well, on one hand, it's most certainly an alternative for you but on the other hand, you would need to show things (like how you do it) and what ever else a peer group needs to see or read concerning the claims to demonstrate why it should be an alternative to them or how it's superior to other techniques using External Mustard Technique given the implication within the claim is that your method is superior to everyone elses

I would ask if the editor has accepted that particular abstract (as is) and which publication will this be appearing in.
Please Note: NO PMs please.

Private correspondence with me concerning questions highly specific to your situation is not an extension of my open participation on the boards.
User avatar
MissJ521@aol.com
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:35 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby Merck456 » Sun Nov 03, 2013 12:27 pm

Hello MissJ521,

You will be able to read about the “Background”, “Method”, “Results” and “Conclusions” in my publication.

I ask you to please have some patience until I’ve posted the link to my publication for you.

Kind regards,
Priv.Doz.Dr.med.W.Merck, Constance, Germany
Merck456
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:58 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby MissJ521@aol.com » Sun Nov 03, 2013 3:34 pm

Thank you Dr. Merck.

Merck456 wrote:Hello MissJ521,

You will be able to read about the “Background”, “Method”, “Results” and “Conclusions” in my publication.

I ask you to please have some patience until I’ve posted the link to my publication for you.

Kind regards,
Priv.Doz.Dr.med.W.Merck, Constance, Germany
Please Note: NO PMs please.

Private correspondence with me concerning questions highly specific to your situation is not an extension of my open participation on the boards.
User avatar
MissJ521@aol.com
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:35 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby Merck456 » Thu Nov 14, 2013 4:32 pm

Hello MissJ521,

I’m pleased to be able to give you the link to my publication now:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 013-0265-9

Kind regards,
Priv.Doz.Dr.med.W.Merck, Constance, Germany
Merck456
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:58 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby MissJ521@aol.com » Thu Nov 14, 2013 6:46 pm

Thank you Dr. Merck for providing the link.
Please Note: NO PMs please.

Private correspondence with me concerning questions highly specific to your situation is not an extension of my open participation on the boards.
User avatar
MissJ521@aol.com
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:35 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby admiral_awesome777 » Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:20 pm

It's a shame you closed the last thread MissJ521 , was it you who closed it. You say that Dr Merck should not post here and answer questions, but I thinking its refreshing to see that he takes the time to do so.
I don't see him promoting his technique , he has only responded when he needed to answer questions that other posters on here have asked.

Can I ask you MissJ521 , who performed your otoplasty ?

It would be great if some patients of Dr Merck would come on here and give their opinions and results.
''Treadcarefully'' claimed to be a former patient but in the end would not back up his claims, which is a shame

Bikerboy posted

''Concerns;- 1..some occasional sharp pains in the stitched area at the back of ear..i hope thats not a sign of the prolene stitches being rejected.
2.. The shape the ear has at the moment.. seems to be assisted by absorbable stitches..I hope when these stitches lose there function the ear doesnt return to much to its old shape.''

''ABSORBABLE STITCHES'' What is he referring to here. I thought the stitches were there for life. To hold ear in position , they don't absorb do they ??

He also posted '' Pros;- The shape and position of the ear at the moment is all I could have hoped for. I believe in this method and cant see why anyone would prefer the traditional method..Im so convinced this is the way to go with ear correction.''

Which is great to see a positive response to Dr Mercks technique
admiral_awesome777
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:27 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby MissJ521@aol.com » Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:30 pm

Dr. Merck IS posting here. So, maybe he will answer your questions.

The locked thread is still up where you can follow and figure out yourself why it was locked. It does not matter who my doc was.

admiral_awesome777 wrote:It's a shame you closed the last thread MissJ521 , was it you who closed it. You say that Dr Merck should not post here and answer questions, but I thinking its refreshing to see that he takes the time to do so.
I don't see him promoting his technique , he has only responded when he needed to answer questions that other posters on here have asked.

Can I ask you MissJ521 , who performed your otoplasty ?

It would be great if some patients of Dr Merck would come on here and give their opinions and results.
''Treadcarefully'' claimed to be a former patient but in the end would not back up his claims, which is a shame

Bikerboy posted

''Concerns;- 1..some occasional sharp pains in the stitched area at the back of ear..i hope thats not a sign of the prolene stitches being rejected.
2.. The shape the ear has at the moment.. seems to be assisted by absorbable stitches..I hope when these stitches lose there function the ear doesnt return to much to its old shape.''

''ABSORBABLE STITCHES'' What is he referring to here. I thought the stitches were there for life. To hold ear in position , they don't absorb do they ??

He also posted '' Pros;- The shape and position of the ear at the moment is all I could have hoped for. I believe in this method and cant see why anyone would prefer the traditional method..Im so convinced this is the way to go with ear correction.''

Which is great to see a positive response to Dr Mercks technique
Please Note: NO PMs please.

Private correspondence with me concerning questions highly specific to your situation is not an extension of my open participation on the boards.
User avatar
MissJ521@aol.com
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:35 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby Merck456 » Wed Nov 20, 2013 2:46 pm

Hello admiral_awesome777,

I’m happy to answer your question:

''ABSORBABLE STITCHES'. What is he referring to here. I thought the stitches were there for life. To hold ear in position , they don't absorb do they ??"

With my method, I place non-absorbable threads (Goretex or Prolene) invisibly under the skin to pin the ear, and superficial absorbable skin stitches additionally. The latter are on the back of the ear and cannot be seen as they are hair-thin, lie in the deepest part of the retroauricular sulcus, and are cut off 2mm above the skin surface. They are there for the closure of the 2 to 3 very small, roughly 3mm-long stab incisions that are necessary to be able to sink the threads and their knots invisibly under the skin here. Actually, I don’t need to close these stab incisions with a thread as they would heal up invisibly without any stitches, but I close these tiny openings in the skin to prevent infection from developing. These superficial skin stitches take between 3 to 5 weeks to fall out by themselves. They are not there to fix the ears in their new position, as Bikeboy feared. The ears are held in their new position only with the invisible, non-absorbable Goretex or Prolene threads that lie under the skin. In other words, an ear will not return to its old position when the superficial skin stitches fall out.

Kind regards,
Priv.Doz.Dr.med.W.Merck, Constance, Germany
Merck456
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:58 pm



Postby Merck456 » Tue Aug 25, 2015 2:16 pm

[
Last edited by Merck456 on Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Merck456
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:58 pm



Re: dr merck method

Postby sarahjane1967 » Wed Jan 13, 2016 12:04 pm

any long term pics of this method would be great to see.
sarahjane1967
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 11:21 am



Re: dr merck method

Postby Merck456 » Sun Jan 24, 2016 1:52 pm

The relapse quota with Dr Merck’s Stitch Method is 4.9%. Please see the following link:
http://www.ear-clinic.com/comparison-chart.html

Kind regards,
Priv.Doz.Dr.med.W.Merck, Constance, Germany
Merck456
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:58 pm



Previous

Return to Otoplasty, Ear Surgery

 

Featured Specialists








cron