The human ear (Fig. 1) is of an ovoid form, with its larger end directed upward. Its lateral surface is irregularly concave, directed slightly forward, and presents numerous eminences and depressions to which names have been assigned (Beahm, Walton, 2002; Walton, Beahm, 2002). The prominent rim of the human ear is called the helix while another curved prominence, parallel with and in front of the helix, is called the antihelix; this divides above into two crura, between which is a triangular depression, the fossa triangularis. The narrowcurved depression between the helix and the antihelix is called the scapha; the antihelix describes a curve around a deep, capacious cavity, the concha, which is partially divided into two parts by the crus or commencement of the helix; the upper part is termed the cymba concha, the lower part the cavum concha. In front of the concha, and projecting backward over the meatus, is a small pointed eminence, the tragus, so called from its being generally covered on its under surface with a tuft of hair, resembling a goat’s beard. Opposite the tragus, and separated from it by the intertragic notch, is a small tubercle, the antitragus. Below this is the lobule, composed of tough areolar and adipose tissues, and wanting the firmness and elasticity of the rest of the auricula. Up to now, total human ear reconstruction for congenital microtia or auricular traumatic amputation still remains one of the greatest challenges for plastic surgeons(Brent, 1999; Nagata, 1993; TANZER, 1959). Although tissue engineering is a promising method for repair and reconstruction of cartilage defects(Chung, Burdick, 2008; Langer, Vacanti, 1993), engineering cartilage with a delicate three dimensional (3D) structure, such as a human ear, remains a great challenge in this field(Ciorba, Martini, 2006; Sterodimas et al., 2009; Zhang, 2010). Since in 1997 Cao et al. engineered the cartilage with a shape of human auricle in a nude mouse model(Cao et al., 1997), many researchers have tried to explore further developments of this tissue engineering system, but few of them have succeeded in in vitro regeneration of a cartilage construct with a complete and anatomically refined auricle structure(Haisch et al., 2002; Isogai et al., 2004; Kamil et al., 2003; Kamil et al., 2004; Naumann et al., 2003; Neumeister et al., 2006; Shieh et al., 2004; Xu et al., 2005)(Table 1). One major reason leading to the failure of in vitro engineering a cartilage construct with sufficient control over shape is the lack of appropriate scaffolds(Liu et al., 2010). The optimal scaffold used for engineering a cartilage construct with accurate designed shapes should possess at least three characteristics: good biocompatibility for cartilage formation, ease of