Speech and Hearing Outcomes of the Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate: Comparison between One-Stage Simultaneous and Two-Stage Surgical Repairs

2020 ◽  
Vol 103 (11) ◽  
pp. 1171-1177
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Common Belief ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Palatal Fistula ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cleft Lip Palate ◽  
Palate Repair

Background: Conventional treatment for cleft lip and palate patients is lip repair at three to four months and then palatal repair at nine to 12 months of age. However, for the patients who delay seeing a doctor especially in a developing area such as Northern Thailand, simultaneous lip and palate repair is performed at 12 to 18 months of age or later, depending on the age at the first visit. It is a common belief that patients with cleft lip and palate will be behind non-cleft patients in early development phonemes because of the open palate. This delay persists until the palate is repaired and on into the postoperative period. This proposition has not been proven with long-term clinical outcomes in one-stage repairs. Objective: To investigate the effects of one-stage repair on speech assessment, hearing, and incidence of palatal fistula. The results were compared with conventional two-stage surgical repairs. Materials and Methods: The present study was designed two groups. Group 1 consisted of 25 children (mean age 11.28±1.93 years) treated with a one-stage repair. Cleft lip, palate, and alveolus were repaired at a single surgical session in the first 18 months of life (mean age at the time of surgery 13.52±4.51 months). Group 2 consisted of 17 children (mean age 11.02±2.23 years) treated in two-stage surgical repairs. Lip repair was performed at a median age of 4.01 months (IQR 3.62 to 5.46), and palate repair was performed at a mean age of 13.54±4.14 months. Both groups underwent cleft lip and palate repairs at the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2010. Speech and hearing for all patients were evaluated by experienced ENT doctors. The palatal fistula was evaluated by the same plastic surgeons. Results: One-stage repair showed significant normal articulation and less articulation disorder when compared with two-stage surgical repairs. However, no significant difference was determined for other speech assessments, hearing, and incidence of palatal fistula. Conclusion: Because one-stage repair seems to have a more positive influence on articulation, and both surgical treatment protocols give similar results on speech assessments, hearing, and incidence of palatal fistula, regardless of the timing of the surgery, the one-stage repair is not inferior to conventional two-stage surgical repairs for patients in developing areas. This is due to several important advantages, such as less hospitalization, lower cost, and less chance of nosocomial infection. Keywords: One-stage repair, Speech, Hearing, Palatal fistula, Cleft lip, Palate

scholarly journals Considerations Regarding Age at Surgery and Fistula Incidence Using One- and Two-stage Closure for Cleft Palate

2013 ◽  
Vol 59 (6) ◽  
pp. 302-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stoicescu Simona ◽  
Enescu Dm
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Fistula Formation ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Age At Surgery ◽  
Cleft Palate Repair ◽  
Palate Repair

Abstract Introduction: Although cleft lip and palate (CLP) is one of the most common congenital malformations, occurring in 1 in 700 live births, there is still no generally accepted treatment protocol. Numerous surgical techniques have been described for cleft palate repair; these techniques can be divided into one-stage (one operation) cleft palate repair and two-stage cleft palate closure. The aim of this study is to present our cleft palate team experience in using the two-stage cleft palate closure and the clinical outcomes in terms of oronasal fistula rate. Material and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on medical records of 80 patients who underwent palate repair over a five-year period, from 2008 to 2012. All cleft palate patients were incorporated. Information on patient’s gender, cleft type, age at repair, one- or two-stage cleft palate repair were collected and analyzed. Results: Fifty-three (66%) and twenty-seven (34%) patients underwent two-stage and one-stage repair, respectively. According to Veau classification, more than 60% of them were Veau III and IV, associating cleft lip to cleft palate. Fistula occurred in 34% of the two-stage repairs versus 7% of one-stage repairs, with an overall incidence of 24%. Conclusions: Our study has shown that a two-stage cleft palate closure has a higher rate of fistula formation when compared with the one-stage repair. Two-stage repair is the protocol of choice in wide complete cleft lip and palate cases, while one-stage procedure is a good option for cleft palate alone, or some specific cleft lip and palate cases (narrow cleft palate, older age at surgery)

Repair of Asymmetric Bilateral Cleft lip: 1 Stage or 2 Stage

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110139
Author(s):  
Xinran Zhao ◽  
Yilai Wu ◽  
Guomin Wang ◽  
Yusheng Yang ◽  
Ming Cai
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Scar Tissue ◽  
Anatomical Reduction ◽  
Scoring Method ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Bilateral Cleft Lip ◽  
Surgery Outcomes

Objective: To verify the advantages and indications of 1-stage and 2-stage repair for asymmetric bilateral cleft lip (BCL). Design: Retrospective study. Setting: From January 2004 to December 2016 in our department. Patients: Patients with BCL. Main Outcome Measure(s): Over 6 months after the operation, the surgery outcomes were evaluated and graded by 2 experienced surgeons. Results: The result of surgery was evaluated using the scoring method of Mortier et al and Anastassov and Chipkov. Among 133 patients with asymmetric BCL, 61 (45.9%) had 1-stage repair and 72 (54.1%) had 2-stage repair. Sixty-eight (51.1%) patients had complete-incomplete cleft lip (CL), and those who underwent 1-stage repair showed a trend of better outcome ( P = .028). Fifty (37.6%) patients with incomplete-microform CL showed no significant difference between the outcomes of 2 surgery plans ( P = .253). In 15 (11.3%) patients with complete-microform CL, only one had 1-stage repair with a score of 8.5. The other 14 patients with 2-stage repair were scored 3.68 ± 1.28. Two-stage repair was preferable when the deformity degree was very different on 2 sides, as it could reduce unnecessary scar tissue and extend the nasal columella. One-stage repair could help to achieve the anatomical reduction of the orbicularis oris and a better contour of the vermilion tubercle. Conclusion: One-stage repair is recommended for patients with complete-incomplete CL and incomplete-microform CL. Two-stage repair for patients with complete-microform CL is preferred in our center, but more studies are required to support this conclusion.

One-stage (Warsaw) and two-stage (Oslo) repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate: Craniofacial outcomes

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (7) ◽  
pp. 1224-1231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Stanislaw Fudalej ◽  
Ewa Wegrodzka ◽  
Gunvor Semb ◽  
Maria Hortis-Dzierzbicka
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage

scholarly journals Closer to the Truth on National Fistula Prevalence After Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip and Palate Repair? The Cleft Care UK Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13
Author(s):  
Arthur S. Yang ◽  
Bruce M. Richard ◽  
Andrew K. Wills ◽  
Osama Mahmoud ◽  
Jonathan R. Sandy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Palatal Fistula ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Palate Repair

Objectives: To (1) determine the prevalence of nonperialveolar palatal fistula up to age 5 following repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) in the United Kingdom, (2) examine the association of palatoplasty techniques with fistula occurrence, and (3) describe the frequency of fistula repairs and their success. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: All 11 centralized regional cleft centers in the United Kingdom. Participants: Two hundred sixty-eight children born between 2005 and 2007 recruited by Cleft Care UK, a nationwide cross-sectional study of all 5-year-old children born with nonsyndromic UCLP. Main Outcome Measure: Nonperialveolar palatal fistula prevalence up to age 5. Results: Fistulas were found in 72 children (31.3%, 95% confidence interval: 25.4%-37.7%) and had no significant association with palate repair sequences. Twenty-four fistulas were repaired by age 5, 12 of which had data showing 10 (83.3%) successful repairs. Conclusion: The prevalence of nonperialveolar fistulas following primary palatoplasty of UCLP in the United Kingdom was higher than previously reported. This information should be part of the preoperative discussion with families. Prospective collection of the presence of fistulas will be necessary before we can associate the occurrence of fistulas with a surgeon, institution, surgical technique, or protocol of care.

Hard Palate Repair Timing and Facial Growth in Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review

2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 563-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu-Fang Liao ◽  
Michael Mars
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hard Palate ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Facial Growth ◽  
Cleft Lip Palate ◽  
Palate Repair

Objective: To evaluate the effect of timing of hard palate repair on facial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate, with special reference to cranial base, maxilla, mandible, jaw relation, and incisor relation. Design: A systematic review. Methods: The search strategy was based on the key words “facial growth,” “cleft lip palate,” and “timing of (hard) palate repair.” Case reports, case-series, and studies with no control or comparison group in the sample were excluded. Results: Fifteen studies met the selection criteria. All the studies were retrospective and nonrandomized. Five studies used cephalometry and casts, seven used cephalometry, and three used casts. Methodological deficiencies and heterogeneity of the studies prevented major conclusions. Conclusion: The review highlights the importance of further research. Prospective well-designed, controlled studies, especially targeting long-term results, are required to elucidate the effect of timing of hard palate repair on facial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate.

Early Two-Stage Palatoplasty Using Modified Furlow's Veloplasty

2010 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishio Juntaro ◽  
Yamanishi Tadashi ◽  
Hiroshi Kohara ◽  
Yoshiko Hirano ◽  
Michiyo Sako ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Dental Occlusion ◽  
Central Incisor ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Normal Occlusion ◽  
New Treatment ◽  
Velopharyngeal Function

Objective To achieve sufficient velopharyngeal function and maxillary growth for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), the authors have designed a new treatment protocol for palate closure involving early two-stage palatoplasty with modified Furlow veloplasty. Details of the surgical protocol and the outcomes of the dental occlusion of patients at 4 years of age are presented. Design and Setting This was an institutional retrospective study. Patients Seventy-two UCLP patients were divided into two groups based on their treatment protocols: patients treated using the early two-stage palatoplasty protocol (ETS group; n = 30) and patients treated using Wardill-Kilner push-back palatoplasty performed at 1 year of age (PB group; n = 42). Interventions The features of the ETS protocol are as follows: The soft palate is repaired at 12 months of age using a modified Furlow technique. The residual cleft in the hard palate is closed at 18 months of age. Lip repair is carried out at 3 months of age with a modified Millard technique for all subjects. Results The ETS group showed a significantly better occlusal condition than the PB group. The incidence of normal occlusion at the noncleft side central incisor was 7.1% in the PB group; whereas, it was 66.7% in the ETS group. Conclusion The results indicate that the early two-stage protocol is advantageous for UCLP children in attaining better dental occlusion at 4 years of age.

One-Stage Cleft Lip and Palate Repair in an Older Population

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. e426-e430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethem Guneren ◽  
Halil Ibrahim Canter ◽  
Kemalettin Yildiz ◽  
Resit Burak Kayan ◽  
Mustafa Aykut Ozpur ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Older Population ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Palate Repair
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document