Woman outraged after doctors removed part of her ear during nose job operation
A woman in China was left outraged when she found out that her doctor had used part of her ear for her nose job.
- Four days after her surgery, Zhao noticed that a part of her ear was missing.
- The doctor had used her tragus (the small pointed part on the inner side of the external ear) without having her consent.
- Zhao asked for a refund, compensation, and plastic surgery to repair her ear.
- Her request was denied.
Four days after her rhinoplasty surgery, the 31-year-old Zhao found that a part of her ear was missing.
According to the Chinese news site The Paper, Zhao had her first nose job five years ago. On September 1st of this year, the woman decided to get another nose job and an arm liposuction surgery at the Angel Wing Hospital in Chengdu. The $7,530 operation lasted from 9 am until early afternoon and it had reportedly gone successfully. The Sun claimed that Zhao was left pleased with the results of the surgery as she felt good and did not notice anything unusual. Four days later, however, she was left petrified and shocked. Speaking to local media, the patient explained that a part of her ear was missing and that she had not given her consent to have her tragus removed. Furthermore, she shared that she had expected her surgeon to use cartilage from behind her ear.
Outraged, she contacted the hospital and sent photographs of her ear.
Upon finding a part of her ear missing, Zhao immediately contacted the hospital’s customer service team. She filed her complaint and sent photographs of her ear. According to Lad Bible, a representative responded and explained that having the tragus removed is ‘normal procedure’. Moreover, they explained that the removal of cartilage from behind the ear could cause ear atrophy. Unsatisfied with this response, Zhao insisted that she had spoken to numerous doctors who all confirmed that cartilage from behind the ear is most commonly used. She further explained that the reason for this is that removing cartilage from behind the ear does not affect the physical appearance or the physiological functions of the ear.
Following the removal of her tragus, Zhao can no longer use earphones.
Unsurprisingly, the patient has demanded a full refund, compensation, and plastic surgery to repair her ear. However, her requests have been denied as the vice president of the hospital’s administration, Yuan, explained that Zhao had signed an agreement before the surgery. By signing, she had given her informed consent that ‘cartilage rhinoplasty’ would be used; this, Yuan clarified, included the whole ear.