Primary Cleft Lip and Palate Repair in Assam, India: Does Preoperative Anthropometric Analysis Help Identify Patients with Increased Surgical Risk in a Clinically Prescreened Population?

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 720-725
Author(s):  
Mairin A. Jerome ◽  
Justin Gillenwater ◽  
Donald R. Laub ◽  
Turner Osler ◽  
Anna Y. Allan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Care Center ◽  
Preoperative Assessment ◽  
Complete Information ◽  
Surgical Mission ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Z Scores ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective To compare anthropometric z-scores with incidence of post-operative complications for patients undergoing primary cleft lip or palate repair. Design This was a retrospective observational analysis of patients from a surgical center in Assam, India, and includes a cohort from a single surgical mission completed before the opening of the center. Setting Patients included in the study underwent surgery during an Operation Smile mission before the opening of Operation Smile's Guwahati Comprehensive Cleft Care Center in Guwahati, India. The remaining cohort received treatment at the center. All patients received preoperative assessment and screening; surgery; and postoperative care, education, and follow-up. Patients, Participants Our sample size included 1941 patients and consisted of all patients with complete information in the database who returned for follow-up after receiving primary cleft lip repair or primary cleft palate repair between January 2011 and April 2013. Interventions Preoperative anthropometric measurements. Main Outcome Measure(s) Postoperative complications. Results Anthropometric z-scores were not a significant predictor of adverse surgical outcomes in the group analyzed. Palate surgery had increased risk of complication versus lip repair, with an overall odds ratio of 5.66 ( P < .001) for all patients aged 3 to 228 months. Conclusions Anthropometric z-scores were not correlated with increased risk of surgical complications, possibly because patients were well screened for malnutrition before surgery at this center. Primary palate repair is associated with an approximate fivefold increased risk of developing postoperative complication(s) compared with primary lip repair.

Repair of Protruding Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate With Staged Premaxilla Setback Osteotomy, Cheiloplasty, and Palatoplasty in Trisomy 17p Patient: A Review of Syndromic Clinical Characteristic

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110698
Author(s):  
Kristaninta Bangun ◽  
Jessica Halim ◽  
Vika Tania
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Chromosome 17 ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Surgical Strategies ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Cost

Chromosome 17 duplication is correlated with an increased risk of developmental delay, birth defects, and intellectual disability. Here, we reported a female patient with trisomy 17 on the whole short arm with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP). This study will review the surgical strategies to reconstruct the protruding premaxillary segment, cleft lip, and palate in trisomy 17p patient. The patient had heterozygous pathogenic duplication of chromosomal region chr17:526-18777088 on almost the entire short arm of chromosome 17. Beside the commonly found features of trisomy 17p, the patient also presented with BCLP with a prominent premaxillary portion. Premaxillary setback surgery was first performed concomitantly with cheiloplasty. The ostectomy was performed posterior to the vomero-premaxillary suture (VPS). The premaxilla was firmly adhered to the lateral segment and the viability of philtral flap was not compromised. Two-flap palatoplasty with modified intravelar veloplasty (IVV) was performed 4 months after. Successful positioning of the premaxilla segment, satisfactory lip aesthetics, and vital palatal flap was obtained from premaxillary setback, primary cheiloplasty, and subsequent palatoplasty in our trisomy 17p patient presenting with BLCP. Postoperative premaxillary stability and patency of the philtral and palatal flap were achieved. Longer follow-up is needed to evaluate the long-term effects of our surgical techniques on inhibition of midfacial growth. However, the benefits that the patient received from the surgery in improving feeding capacity and facial appearance early in life outweigh the cost of possible maxillary retrusion.

Improved Early Cleft Lip and Palate Complications at a Surgery Specialty Center in the Developing World

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (8) ◽  
pp. 1145-1152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene Park ◽  
Gaurav Deshpande ◽  
Bjorn Schonmeyr ◽  
Carolina Restrepo ◽  
Alex Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Developing World ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Surgical Mission ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Cleft Lip Repair ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective: To evaluate complication rates following cleft lip and cleft palate repairs during the transition from mission-based care to center-based care in a developing region. Patients and Design: We performed a retrospective review of 3419 patients who underwent cleft lip repair and 1728 patients who underwent cleft palate repair in Guwahati, India between December 2010 and February 2014. Of those who underwent cleft lip repair, 654 were treated during a surgical mission and 2765 were treated at a permanent center. Of those who underwent cleft palate repair, 236 were treated during a surgical mission and 1491 were treated at a permanent center. Setting: Two large surgical missions to Guwahati, India, and the Guwahati Comprehensive Cleft Care Center (GCCCC) in Assam, India. Main Outcome Measure: Overall complication rates following cleft lip and cleft palate repair. Results: Overall complication rates following cleft lip repair were 13.2% for the first mission, 6.7% for the second mission, and 4.0% at GCCCC. Overall complication rates following cleft palate repair were 28.0% for the first mission, 30.0% for the second mission, and 15.8% at GCCCC. Complication rates following cleft palate repair by the subset of surgeons permanently based at GCCCC (7.2%) were lower than visiting surgeons ( P < .05). Conclusions: Our findings support the notion that transitioning from a mission-based model to a permanent facility-based model of cleft care delivery in the developing world can lead to decreased complication rates.

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

Report of a hemohiliac's cleft lip and palate repair ? ten year follow-up

1988 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-42
Author(s):  
K. Satoh ◽  
Y. Tojima ◽  
Y. Nakayama
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Palate Repair

Differences in Weight Loss and Recovery After Cleft Lip and Palate Repair

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-203
Author(s):  
Alison Kaye ◽  
Columbine Che
Keyword(s):  
Weight Loss ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Postoperative Weight Loss ◽  
Postoperative Visit ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Palate Repair ◽  
Preoperative Weight

Objective: To determine the degree of weight loss, time to regain lost weight, and impact on postoperative outcomes after primary cleft lip (CL) and cleft palate (CP) repair. Design: Single institution retrospective. Patients: Two hundred seven patients who underwent primary CL and/or CP repair procedures. Results: One hundred thirty primary CL repairs (isolated CL = 59; cleft lip and palate [CLP] = 71) and 140 primary CP repairs (isolated CP = 72; CLP = 69): At the first postoperative visit, 21.54% of CL and 57.14% of CP repair patients had not returned to their immediate preoperative weights ( P < .0001). Maximum weight loss after CL repair was 0.44 kg (mean = 0.15 kg; standard deviation [SD]: 0.11) and for CP repair was 0.85 kg (mean = 0.31 kg; SD: 0.21; P = .002). Maximum percentage body weight loss was 6.11% after CL repair (mean = 2.08%; SD: 1.56) and 9.2% after CP repair (mean = 3.10%; SD: 2.13; P = .02). If not returned to preoperative weight by first postoperative visit, CP repair took significantly longer. Median time to return to preoperative weight was CL = 14.08 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 7.26) and CP = 25.37 days (IQR: 21.07; P < .0001). Patients undergoing CP repair with slowed weight recovery had a 22.5% rate of unintentional fistula/partial dehiscence compared to 10.0% of those who recovered quickly ( P = .052). Conclusions: Primary CP repair involves significantly higher risk and degree of postoperative weight loss and slower rates of weight recovery when compared with primary CL repair. Postoperative weight loss is associated with increased risk of complications with palatal healing. Cleft palate repair patients should be monitored closely for weight recovery and considered for nutritional interventions to support improved postoperative outcomes.

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.

Skeletal and Dental Correction and Stability Following LeFort I Advancement in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate With Mild, Moderate, and Severe Maxillary Hypoplasia

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562199610
Author(s):  
Buddhathida Wangsrimongkol ◽  
Roberto L. Flores ◽  
David A. Staffenberg ◽  
Eduardo D. Rodriguez ◽  
Pradip. R. Shetye
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Maxillary Hypoplasia ◽  
Main Outcome Measure ◽  
Lateral Cephalograms

Objective: This study evaluates skeletal and dental outcomes of LeFort I advancement surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) with varying degrees of maxillary skeletal hypoplasia. Design: Retrospective study. Method: Lateral cephalograms were digitized at preoperative (T1), immediately postoperative (T2), and 1-year follow-up (T3) and compared to untreated unaffected controls. Based on the severity of cleft maxillary hypoplasia, the sample was divided into 3 groups using Wits analysis: mild: ≤0 to ≥−5 mm; moderate: <−5 to >−10 mm; and severe: ≤−10 mm. Participants: Fifty-one patients with nonsyndromic CLP with hypoplastic maxilla who met inclusion criteria. Intervention: LeFort I advancement. Main Outcome Measure: Skeletal and dental stability post-LeFort I surgery at a 1-year follow-up. Results: At T2, LeFort I surgery produced an average correction of maxillary hypoplasia by 6.4 ± 0.6, 8.1 ± 0.4, and 10.7 ± 0.8 mm in the mild, moderate, and severe groups, respectively. There was a mean relapse of 1 to 1.5 mm observed in all groups. At T3, no statistically significant differences were observed between the surgical groups and controls at angle Sella, Nasion, A point (SNA), A point, Nasion, B point (ANB), and overjet outcome measures. Conclusions: LeFort I advancement produces a stable correction in mild, moderate, and severe skeletal maxillary hypoplasia. Overcorrection is recommended in all patients with CLP to compensate for the expected postsurgical skeletal relapse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document