Tongue flap repair of oronasal fistula in cleft palate patients. A review of 20 patients

Introduction: Oronasal fistulae following palatoplasty may affect patients’ quality of life by impacting their ability to eat, speak, and maintain oral hygiene. We aimed to quantify the impact of previous oronasal fistula repair on patients’ quality of life using patient-reported outcome psychometric tools. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 8- to 9-year-old patients with cleft palate and/or lip was completed. Patients who had a cleft team clinic between September 2018 and August 2019 were recruited. Participants were divided into 2 groups (no fistula, prior fistula repair). Differences in the individual CLEFT-Q and Child Oral Health Impact Profile-Short Form 19 (COHIP-SF 19) Oral Health scores between the 2 groups were evaluated using a multivariate analysis controlling for Veau classification and syndromic diagnosis. Results: Sixty patients with a history of cleft palate were included. Forty-two (70%) patients had an associated cleft lip. Thirty-two (53.3%) patients had no history of fistula and 28 (46.7%) patients had undergone a fistula repair. CLEFT-Q Dental, Jaw, and Speech Function were all higher in patients without a history of a fistula repair; however, none of these differences were statistically significant. The COHIP-SF 19 Oral Health score demonstrated a significantly lower score in the fistula group, indicating poorer oral health ( P = .05). Conclusions: One would expect that successful repair of a fistula would result in improved function and patient satisfaction, but the consistent trend toward lower CLEFT-Q scores and significantly increased COHIP-SF 19 Oral Health scores in our study group suggests that residual effects linger and that the morbidity of a fistula may not be completely treated with a secondary correction.

Download Full-text

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

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal ◽

10.1177/1055665620959528 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Single-layer Closure with Tongue Flap for Palatal Fistula in Cleft Palate Patients

Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open ◽

10.1097/gox.0000000000000841 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 4 (8) ◽

pp. e852 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Abdulla K. Alsalman ◽

Emran A. Algadiem ◽

Mufeed Saeed Alwabari ◽

Fatimah Jawad Almugarrab

Keyword(s):

Cleft Palate ◽

Single Layer ◽

Palatal Fistula ◽

Tongue Flap

Download Full-text

Repair of Recurrent Cleft Palate with Free Vastus Lateralis Muscle Flap

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal ◽

10.1597/11-008 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 49 (2) ◽

pp. 245-248 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

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.

Download Full-text