Maxillary Growth Controversies after Two-Stage Palatal Repair with Delayed Hard Palate Closure in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Perspectives from Literature and Personal Experience

2007 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Friede
Keyword(s):  
Personal Experience ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Maxillary Growth ◽  
Palatal Surgery

Objective: To analyze published papers dealing with delayed hard palate repair within a two-stage palatal surgery protocol in treatment of cleft lip and palate. Timing of the procedures, methods used, as well as growth results were considered. Method: By utilizing this information in relation to knowledge about normal maxillary development, efforts were made to explain differences in growth outcome between different investigations. Particularly, follow-up reports of unilateral cleft lip and palate patients with records up to at least 10 years of age were studied. Results: Most papers reported an excellent or very good maxillary growth outcome after their delayed hard palate closure protocols. Where unsatisfactory results were published, reasonable explanations were found accounting for why the method had failed the expectation of good maxillary growth. Conclusion: Based on the published reports and the experience from a cleft team where the studied protocol has been practiced since 1975, recommendation for method as well as timing for the two-stage protocol is laid out in some detail.

Two-Stage Palate Repair with Delayed Hard Palate Closure Is Related to Favorable Maxillary Growth in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate

2010 ◽  
Vol 125 (5) ◽  
pp. 1503-1510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Fang Liao ◽  
I-Ying Yang ◽  
Ruby Wang ◽  
Claudia Yun ◽  
Chiung-Shing Huang
Keyword(s):  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Maxillary Growth

WITHDRAWN—Administrative Duplicate Publication: Voice Quality in Adults Treated for Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: Long-term Follow-up After 1- or 2-Stage Palate Repair

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (5) ◽  
pp. 758-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Staffan Morén ◽  
Per Åke Lindestad ◽  
Mats Holmström ◽  
Maria Mani
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Voice Quality ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Duplicate Publication ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Palate Repair

Morén, S., Lindestad, P. Å., Holmström, M., & Mani, M. (2018). Voice Quality in Adults Treated for Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: Long-term Follow-up After 1- or 2-Stage Palate Repair. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 55(5), 758–768. DOI: 10.1177/1055665618754946 Article withdrawn by publisher. Due to an administrative error, this article was accidentally published in Volume 55 Issue 5 as well as Volume 55 Issue 8 of publishing year 2018 with different DOIs and different page numbers. The incorrect version of the article with DOI: 10.1177/1055665618754946 has been replaced with this correction notice. The correct and citable version of the article remains: Morén, S., Lindestad, P. Å., Holmström, M., & Mani, M. (2018). Voice Quality in Adults Treated for Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: Long-Term Follow-Up After One- or Two-Stage Palate Repair. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 55(8), 1103–1114. DOI: 10.1177/1055665618764521

scholarly journals Maxillary Growth and Speech Outcome in Patient with Cleft Lip and Palate after Two-Stage Palate Repair: A Systematic Review

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mulyadi Mulyadi ◽  
Prasetyanugraheni Kreshanti ◽  
Siti Handayani ◽  
Kristaninta Bangun
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
English Language ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Language Studies ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Maxillary Growth

Background: The management of patients with cleft lip and palate is complex, where the treatment outcome is judged on the balance between aesthetics, speech, and maxillary growth. Up to now, there is no generally accepted treatment protocol. Every center must find the best-suited protocol treatment for their population. Methods: A systematic review through literature search was conducted for English-language studies in PubMed. This search was conducted in September 2011 using EndNote X3 with keywords: Two-stage Palate Repair and Maxillary Growth and Two-stage Palate Repair and Speech Outcome. Both retrospective and prospective studies on maxillary growth and speech outcome in patient with cleft lip and palate after two-stage palate repair published from 2001 to 2012 were included. Result: From the reviewed of 37 articles, only 14 articles fit the inclusions criteria, three articles discussed the outcome of maxillary growth and speech outcome, eight articles only discussed the maxillary growth and the rest of articles only discussed the speech outcome. Conclusion:From this review we found that most of the two-stage palate repair results in better maxillary growth, but only few of them results in good speech outcome. We will perform further study based on this review to discover a new protocol for the management of palate repair in our center.

Maxillary Growth in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients, With and Without Vomerine Flap Closure of the Hard Palate at the Time of Lip Repair

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (9) ◽  
pp. 1205-1210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman Hay ◽  
Brijesh Patel ◽  
Priya Haria ◽  
Brian Sommerlad
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Study Support ◽  
Maxillary Growth ◽  
Flap Closure ◽  
Anterior Posterior

Objective: To assess the midterm effect on maxillary growth of vomerine flap (VF) closure of the hard palate, at the time of lip repair. Design: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected nonrandomized data. Interventions: Consecutive participants with a unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) were operated on, at 3 months of age, by the same surgeon. They were divided into 2 groups, those who had a VF and those who did not (non-VF). Setting: Participants were treated at 2 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Participants: Twenty-eight participants in the VF group and 24 participants in the non-VF group attended follow-up at 10 years of age. Main Outcome Measures: Standardized lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken at 10 years. Following tracing and digitization, parameters to assess the maxillary growth were analyzed. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in the anterior–posterior or vertical skeletal cephalometric parameters. Conclusions: The results of this study support the statement that VF repair does not significantly affect maxillary growth in patients with a UCLP, when assessed cephalometrically at 10 years of age. It should be noted that at this age, growth is not yet complete.

Vomer flap for hard palate repair is related to favorable maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip and palate

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1269-1276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Fang Liao ◽  
Ying-Hsin Lee ◽  
Ruby Wang ◽  
Chiung-Shing Huang ◽  
Philip Kuo-Ting Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Maxillary Growth ◽  
Vomer Flap

Hard Palate Repair Timing and Facial Growth in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Longitudinal Study

2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 547-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Fang Liao ◽  
Timothy J. Cole ◽  
Michael Mars
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Sri Lankan ◽  
Facial Morphology ◽  
Facial Growth ◽  
Clinical Notes ◽  
Timing Effect ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective: To investigate whether timing of hard palate repair had a significant effect on facial growth in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective longitudinal study. Setting: Sri Lankan Cleft Lip and Palate Project. Patients: A total of 104 patients with nonsyndromic UCLP who had hard palate repair by age 13 years, with their 290 cephalometric radiographs taken after lip and palate repair. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical notes were used to record surgical treatment histories. Cephalometry was used to determine facial morphology and growth rate. Results: Timing of hard palate repair had a significant effect on the length and protrusion of the alveolar maxilla (PMP-A and SNA, respectively) and the anteroposterior alveolar jaw relation (ANB) at age 20 years but not on their growth rates. Conclusion: Timing of hard palate repair significantly affects the growth of the maxilla in patients with UCLP. Late hard palate repair has a smaller adverse effect than does early hard palate repair on the growth of the maxilla. This timing effect primarily affects the anteroposterior development of the maxillary dentoalveolus and is attributed to the development being undisturbed before closure of the hard palate.

scholarly journals Palatal morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: Association with infant cleft dimensions and timing of hard palate repair

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 270-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanna Botticelli ◽  
Annelise Küseler ◽  
Kirsten Mølsted ◽  
Maja Ovsenik ◽  
Sven Erik Nørholt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Palate Repair

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.

A Comparison of Three Methods of Repairing the Hard Palate

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. W. Pigott ◽  
E. H. Albery ◽  
I. S. Hathorn ◽  
N. E. Atack ◽  
A. Williams ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Small Sample Size ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Velopharyngeal Insufficiency ◽  
Strong Trend ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective To compare growth, speech, and nasal symmetry outcomes of three methods of hard palate repair. Patients Consecutive available records of children born with unilateral bony complete cleft lip and palate over the period 1972 to 1992. Interventions Identical management of lip, nose, alveolus, and soft palate. Hard palate repair by Cuthbert Veau (CV) from 1972 to 1981, von Langenbeck (vL) from 1982 to 1989, or medial Langenbeck (ML) from 1989 to 1991. Outcome Measures For growth: GOSLON yardstick or 5-year model index. For speech: articulation test. Nasal anemometry. For nasal symmetry: Coghlan computer-based assessment. All these measures were developed during the period of data collection but not for this project. Results There was a strong trend toward more favorable anteroposterior maxillary growth with the change from CV to vL to ML techniques. This fell short of statistical significance because of the small sample size. There was a significant reduction in cleft-related articulation faults (p = .01) considered to be related to improved arch form. In the absence of improved rates of velopharyngeal insufficiency or nasal symmetry, increased surgical experience was discounted as a significant contribution to improved growth and articulation outcomes. Conclusions Reduced periosteal undermining and residual exposed palatal shelf from CV to vL to ML improved incisor relationships and articulation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document