scholarly journals Oronasal fistula in cleft palate surgery

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S123-S128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Partha Sadhu
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Surgical Procedures ◽  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Local Flaps ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Vascular Accidents ◽  
Nasal Regurgitation

ABSTRACTOronasal fistula (ONF) is the commonest complication associated with cleft palate surgery. The main symptoms associated with ONF are nasal regurgitation of food matter and hypernasality of voice. Repair of cleft palate under tension is considered to be the main reason of ONF though vascular accidents and infection can also be the cause. Most of the ONFs are situated in the hard palate or at the junction of hard and soft palate. Repair of ONF depends on its site, size and mode of presentation. A whole spectrum of surgical procedures starting from small local flaps to microvascular tissue transfers have been employed for closure of ONF. Recurrence rate of ONF is 25% on an average after the first attempt of repair.

On the Frequency of Oronasal Fistulation After Primary Cleft Palate Repair

2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (10) ◽  
pp. 1302-1313
Author(s):  
Ana Tache ◽  
Maurice Y. Mommaerts
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Type Iv ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Fistula Rate

Objective: The aims of the study were to assess the postoperative oronasal fistula rate after 1-stage and 2-stage cleft palate repair and identify risk factors associated with its development. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Various primary cleft and craniofacial centers in the world. Patients, Participants: Syndromic and nonsyndromic cleft lip, alveolus, and palate patients who had undergone primary cleft palate surgery. Intervention: Assessment of oronasal fistula frequency and correlation with staging, timing, and technique of repair, gender, and Veau type. The results obtained in this systematic review were compared with those in previous reports. Outcome: The main outcome is represented by the occurrence of the oronasal fistula after 1-stage versus 2-stage palatoplasty. Results: The mean fistula percentage was 9.94%. In the Veau I, II, III, and IV groups, the respective fistula rates were 2%, 7.3%, 8.3%, and 12.5%. Oronasal fistula locations based on the Pittsburgh Fistula Classification System were soft palate (type II), 16.2%; soft palate–hard palate junction (type III), 29.3%; and hard palate (type IV), 37.3%. There were no statistically significant differences between 1-stage and 2-stage palatoplasty, syndromic and nonsyndromic, or male and female patients. Primary palatoplasty timing was not a significant predictor. Conclusion: Some disparities arose when comparing studies, mainly regarding location and types of clefting prone to oronasal fistulation. Interestingly, the fistula rate does not differ between 1- and 2-stage closure, and timing of the repair does not play a role.

Cleft Palate Repair Using a Marginal Musculo-Mucosal Flap

2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hisao Ogata ◽  
Tatsuo Nakajima ◽  
Fumio Onishi ◽  
Ikkei Tamada ◽  
Makoto Hikosaka
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Formation Rate ◽  
Fistula Formation ◽  
Mucosal Flap ◽  
Periosteal Flap ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective: To describe a modified procedure consisting of a mucoso-periosteal flap palatoplasty with a marginal musculo-mucosal flap (3M flap). This is also the first report of a primary repair for complete cleft palate using the 3M flap. We describe the lengthening effect of the nasal mucous layer of the soft palate and evaluate the fistula formation rate associated with this method. Methods: This procedure has been performed on 21 patients with unilateral complete clefts and on 27 patients with incomplete clefts. A mucoso-periosteal flap raised from the hard palate was used mainly for closure of the cleft and not for the push-back. The 3M flap repaired the deficit of the nasal mucosa, making sure that the soft palate was lengthened. Intravelar veloplasty was performed also. Results: The dimension of the nasal mucosal defect that can be filled with the 3M flap is 10 to 12 mm in length, oriented anterior-posterior, and 15 to 20 mm wide. Oronasal fistula formation was recognized in only 3 of 48 cases (2 of 21 complete clefts, 1 of 27 incomplete clefts) and were located at the hard-soft palate junction at the anterior portion of the 3M flap. Conclusions: This method has the theoretical advantages of (1) preventing fistula formation by filling the tissue deficiency with the 3M flap; (2) achieving better velopharyngeal function due to elongation of the soft palate and retropulsion of the muscular bundle, utilizing the 3M flap; and (3) minimizing maxillary growth retardation by adopting a non–push-back method of hard palate repair.

The State of the Art in Cleft Palate Surgery

2000 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don Larossa
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Surgical Repair ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Current Understanding ◽  
Multiple Methods ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Palate Repair

Overview This update focuses on current practices and controversies in surgical repair of the hard and soft palate posterior to the alveolus. Our current understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of presurgical active and passive manipulation of the hard palate shelves including the use of periosteoplasty is reviewed. The evolution of the multiple methods of repair of the hard and soft palate is given in a historical context along with a discussion of the concerns about timing of palate repair.

scholarly journals Cleft palate repair and variations

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S102-S109
Author(s):  
Karoon Agrawal
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
The Face ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Pharyngeal Flap ◽  
The One ◽  
Ideal Technique

ABSTRACTCleft palate affects almost every function of the face except vision. Today a child born with cleft palate with or without cleft lip should not be considered as unfortunate, because surgical repair of cleft palate has reached a highly satisfactory level. However for an average cleft surgeon palatoplasty remains an enigma. The surgery differs from centre to centre and surgeon to surgeon. However there is general agreement that palatoplasty (soft palate at least) should be performed between 6-12 months of age. Basically there are three groups of palatoplasty techniques. One is for hard palate repair, second for soft palate repair and the third based on the surgical schedule. Hard palate repair techniques are Veau-Wardill-Kilner V-Y, von Langenbeck, two-flap, Aleveolar extension palatoplasty, vomer flap, raw area free palatoplasty etc. The soft palate techniques are intravelar veloplasty, double opposing Z-plasty, radical muscle dissection, primary pharyngeal flap etc. And the protocol based techniques are Schweckendiek's, Malek's, whole in one, modified schedule with palatoplasty before lip repair etc. One should also know the effect of each technique on maxillofacial growth and speech. The ideal technique of palatoplasty is the one which gives perfect speech without affecting the maxillofacial growth and hearing. The techniques are still evolving because we are yet to design an ideal one. It is always good to know all the techniques and variations so that one can choose whichever gives the best result in one's hands. A large number of techniques are available in literature, and also every surgeon incorporates his own modification to make it a variation. However there are some basic techniques, which are described in details which are used in various centres. Some of the important variations are also described.

Is Risk of Secondary Surgery for Oronasal Fistula Following Primary Cleft Palate Repair Associated With Hospital Case Volume and Cost-to-Charge Ratio?

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 603-611
Author(s):  
Giap H. Vu ◽  
Christopher L. Kalmar ◽  
Carrie E. Zimmerman ◽  
Laura S. Humphries ◽  
Jordan W. Swanson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Charge Ratio ◽  
Fistula Repair ◽  
Case Volume ◽  
Secondary Surgery ◽  
Hospital Case ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective: This study assesses the association between risk of secondary surgery for oronasal fistula following primary cleft palate repair and 2 hospital characteristics—cost-to-charge ratio (RCC) and case volume of cleft palate repair. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: This study utilized the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS) database, which consists of clinical and resource-utilization data from >49 hospitals in the United States. Patients and Participants: Patients undergoing primary cleft palate repair from 2004 to 2009 were abstracted from the PHIS database and followed up for oronasal fistula repair between 2004 and 2015. Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome measure was whether patients underwent oronasal fistula repair after primary cleft palate repair. Results: Among 5745 patients from 45 institutions whom met inclusion criteria, 166 (3%) underwent oronasal fistula repair within 6 to 11 years of primary cleft palate repair. Primary palatoplasty at high-RCC facilities was associated with a higher rate of subsequent oronasal fistula repair (odds ratio [OR] = 1.84 [1.32-2.56], adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.81 [1.28-2.59]; P ≤ .001). Likelihood of surgery for oronasal fistula was independent of hospital case volume (OR = 0.83 [0.61-1.13], P = .233; AOR = 0.86 [0.62-1.20], P = .386). Patients with complete unilateral or bilateral cleft palate were more likely to receive oronasal fistula closure compared to those with unilateral-incomplete cleft palate (AOR = 2.09 [1.27-3.56], P = .005; AOR = 3.14 [1.80-5.58], P < .001). Conclusions: Subsequent need for oronasal fistula repair, while independent of hospital case volume for cleft palate repair, increased with increasing hospital RCC. Our study also corroborates complete cleft palate and cleft lip as risk factors for oronasal fistula.

Repair of Recurrent Cleft Palate with Free Vastus Lateralis Muscle Flap

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jose G. Christiano ◽  
Amir H. Dorafshar ◽  
Eduardo D. Rodriguez ◽  
Richard J. Redett
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Vastus Lateralis ◽  
Muscle Flap ◽  
Free Flaps ◽  
Vastus Lateralis Muscle ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Lateralis Muscle ◽  
Palate Repair

A 6-year-old girl presented with a large recalcitrant oronasal fistula after bilateral cleft lip and palate repair and numerous secondary attempts at fistula closure. Incomplete palmar arches precluded a free radial forearm flap. A free vastus lateralis muscle flap was successfully transferred. No fistula recurrence was observed at 18 months. There was no perceived thigh weakness. The surgical scar healed inconspicuously. Free flaps should no longer be considered the last resort for treatment of recalcitrant fistulas after cleft palate repair. A free vastus lateralis muscle flap is an excellent alternative, and possibly a superior option, to other previously described free flaps.

Cleft Palate

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksana A Jackson ◽  
Alison E Kaye ◽  
David W Low
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Normal Function ◽  
Speech Development ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
Surgical Interventions ◽  
Feeding Difficulties ◽  
Oronasal Fistula ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Impaired Speech

A cleft of the palate represents one of the most common congenital anomalies of the craniofacial region. Palatal clefting can occur in combination with a cleft of the lip and alveolus or as an isolated finding and can vary significantly in severity. The intact palate is a structure that separates the oral and nasal cavities, and the function of the palate is to close off the nasal cavity during deglutition and to regulate the flow of air between the nose and mouth during speech production. An unrepaired cleft palate can thus result in nasal regurgitation of food and liquid, early feeding difficulties, and impaired speech development. The goals of surgical repair are to restore palatal integrity by closing the cleft defect and repairing the musculature to allow for normal function during speech. The secondary goal of cleft palate repair is to minimize deleterious effects on growth of the palate and face, which can be impacted by standard surgical interventions. This review describes two of the most commonly performed cleft palate repair techniques in use today, as well as highlighting special anatomic considerations, summarizing perioperative care, and reviewing postoperative complications and their management. This review contains 11 figures, 2 videos, 3 tables and 63 references Key words: cleft, cleft team, Furlow, orofacial, oronasal fistula, palatoplasty, speech, submucous cleft, velopharyngeal insufficiency

Influence of Infant Cleft Dimensions on Velopharyngeal Function in 5-Year-Old Danish Children Born With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 420-429
Author(s):  
Susanna Botticelli ◽  
Annelise Küseler ◽  
Kirsten Mølsted ◽  
Helene Soegaard Andersen ◽  
Maria Boers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Palate ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
Primary Surgery ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Velopharyngeal Function

Aim: To examine the association of cleft severity at infancy and velopharyngeal competence in preschool children with unilateral cleft lip and palate operated with early or delayed hard palate repair. Design: Subgroup analysis within a multicenter randomized controlled trial of primary surgery (Scandcleft). Setting: Tertiary health care. One surgical center. Patients and Methods: One hundred twenty-five infants received cheilo-rhinoplasty and soft palate repair at age 3 to 4 months and were randomized to hard palate closure at age 12 or 36 months. Cleft size and cleft morphology were measured 3 dimensionally on digital models, obtained by laser surface scanning of preoperative plaster models (mean age: 1.8 months). Main outcome measurements: Velopharyngeal competence (VPC) and hypernasality assessed from a naming test (VPC-Sum) and connected speech (VPC-Rate). In both scales, higher scores indicated a more severe velopharyngeal insufficiency. Results: No difference between surgical groups was shown. A low positive correlation was found between posterior cleft width and VPC-Rate (Spearman = .23; P = .025). The role of the covariate “cleft size at tuberosity level” was confirmed in an ordinal logistic regression model (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.01-1.35). A low negative correlation was shown between anteroposterior palatal length and VPC-Sum (Spearman = −.27; P = .004) and confirmed by the pooled scores VPC-Pooled (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.69-0.98) and VPC-Dichotomic (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.99). Conclusions: Posterior cleft dimensions can be a modest indicator for the prognosis of velopharyngeal function at age 5 years, when the soft palate is closed first, independently on the timing of hard palate repair. Antero-posterior palatal length seems to protect from velopharyngeal insufficiency and hypernasality. However, the association found was significant but low.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document