Advertisement

European Journal of Plastic Surgery

, Volume 39, Issue 1, pp 11–22 | Cite as

Critical choices in cleft surgery: 18-year single-surgeon retrospective review of 900 cases

Original Paper
  • 175 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Multidisciplinary management of orofacial clefts may lead to a successful treatment outcome. However, it is quite usual that lack of long-term treatment planning and collaboration among various specialists and lack of standardized surgical protocols result in poor esthetic and functional treatment outcomes. This article aims to hypothesize some critical determinants of outcome in cleft surgery.

Methods

Throughout a period of 18 years, 900 patients with different clinical types of congenital cleft anomaly were subject to primary repair of cleft lip, nose, and palate by single surgeon using various procedures, including preoperative nasoalveolar molding, two-stage and one-stage repair of complete cleft lip and palate, two-flap and one-flap palatoplasty, open tip rhinoplasty, and postoperative nasal molding.

Results

Clinical results of preoperative nasoalveolar molding and surgical repair of lip, nose, and palate were satisfactory for most patients, parents, and surgeon panel.

Conclusions

Treatment based on the individual patient’s facial assets and deficits must be the controlling factor in designing therapy. The essential key to successful management of clefts is to figure out the three-dimensional dynamics that govern the deformity and to recognize a fourth dimension for time along these dynamics in order to envision how a small difference in the position of a single suture during the first surgery can bring about a giant deformity upon completion of facial growth, hence the crucial role of the first surgery and its related concepts, techniques, and tactics in dictating the final outcome of the case.

Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Keywords

Cleft lip palate Orofacial clefts Rhinoplasty Outcomes 

Notes

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. However, for this retrospective study a formal consent from a local ethics committee is not required.

Conflict of interest

Adham Farouk declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Patient consent

Written consent was obtained from the parents or legal guardians of patients included in the study. Additional permission was obtained for the use of their images.

References

  1. 1.
    Cubitt JJ, Hodges AM, Van Lierde KM, Swan MC (2014) Global variation in cleft palate repairs: an analysis of 352,191 primary cleft repairs in low- to higher-middle-income countries. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 51(5):553–556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rozendaal AM, Mohangoo AD, Ongkosuwito EM, Buitendijk SE, Bakker MK, Vermeij-Keers C (2012) Regional variation in prevalence of oral cleft live births in the Netherlands 1997–2007: time-trend analysis of data from three Dutch registries. Am J Med Genet A 158A(1):66–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Knight J, Cassell CH, Meyer RE, Strauss RP (2015) Academic outcomes of children with isolated orofacial clefts compared with children without a major birth defect. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 52(3):259–268PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parker SE, Mai CT, Canfield MA, Rickard R, Wang Y, Meyer RE et al (2010) Updated national birth prevalence estimates for selected birth defects in the United States, 2004–2006. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 88(12):1008–1016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gkantidis N, Papamanou DA, Karamolegkou M, Dorotheou D (2015) Esthetic, functional, and everyday life assessment of individuals with cleft lip and/or palate. Biomed Res Int. Article ID 510395, 8 pages. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1155/2015/510395.
  6. 6.
    Wehby GL, Cassell CH (2010) The impact of orofacial clefts on quality of life and healthcare use and costs. Oral Dis 16(1):3–10PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tannure PN, Soares FM, Kuchler EC, Motta LG, Costa MC, Granjeiro JM (2013) Measuring the impact of quality of life of children treated for orofacial clefts: a case-control study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 37(4):381–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Sa Nobrega ES (2005) Cleft lip nose: a different approach. J Craniofac Surg 16(1):95–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    >Brusse CA, Van der Werff JF, Stevens HP et al (1999) Symmetry and morbidity assessment of unilateral complete cleft lip nose corrected with or without primary nasal correction. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 36(4):361–366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clark JM, Skoner JM, Wang TD (2003) Repair of the unilateral cleft lip/nose deformity. Facial Plast Surg 19(1):29–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oosterkamp BC, Dijkstra PU, Remmelink HJ, Van Oort RP, Goorhuis-Brouwer SM, Sandham A et al (2007) Satisfaction with treatment outcome in bilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 36(10):890–895CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marcusson A, Paulin G, Ostrup L (2002) Facial appearance in adults who had cleft lip and palate treated in childhood. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 36(1):16–23CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sinko K, Jagsch R, Prechtl V, Watzinger F, Hollmann K, Baumann A (2005) Evaluation of esthetic, functional, and quality-of-life outcome in adult cleft lip and palate patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 42(4):355–361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arosarena OA (2002) Update on cleft care. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 10(4):303–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fudalej P, Hortis-Dzierzbicka M, Obloj B, Miller-Drabikowska D, Dudkiewicz Z, Romanowska A (2009) Treatment outcome after one-stage repair in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate assessed with the Goslon Yardstick. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 46(4):374–380CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bearn D, Mildinhall S, Murphy T, Murray JJ, Sell D, Shaw WC et al (2001) Cleft lip and palate care in the United Kingdom—the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) Study. Part 4: outcome comparisons, training, and conclusions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 38(1):38–43CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shaw WC, Brattstrom V, Molsted K, Prahl-Andersen B, Roberts CT, Semb G (2005) The Eurocleft study: intercenter study of treatment outcome in patients with complete cleft lip and palate. Part 5: discussion and conclusions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 42(1):93–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lohmander A, Friede H, Elander A, Persson C, Lilja J (2006) Speech development in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate treated with different delays in closure of the hard palate after early velar repair: a longitudinal perspective. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 40(5):267–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Holland S, Gabbay JS, Heller JB, O’Hara C, Hurwitz D, Ford MD et al (2007) Delayed closure of the hard palate leads to speech problems and deleterious maxillary growth. Plast Reconstr Surg 119(4):1302–1310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morovic CG, Cutting C (2005) Combining the Cutting and Mulliken methods for primary repair of the bilateral cleft lip nose. Plast Reconstr Surg 116(6):1613–1622CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McComb H (1990) Primary repair of the bilateral cleft lip nose: a 15-year review and a new treatment plan. Plast Reconstr Surg 86(5):882–893CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mulliken JB, Wu JK, Padwa BL (2003) Repair of bilateral cleft lip: review, revisions, and reflections. J Craniofac Surg 14(5):609–620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mulliken JB (1992) Correction of the bilateral cleft lip nasal deformity: evolution of a surgical concept. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 29(6):540–545CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grayson BH, Santiago PE, Brecht LE, Cutting CB (1999) Presurgical nasoalveolar molding in infants with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 36(6):468–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grayson BH, Garfinkle JS (2009) Nasoalveolar molding and columella elongation in preparation for the primary repair of unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate. In: Losee JE, Kirschner RA (eds) Comprehensive cleft care. McGraw-Hill Medical, New York, pp 701–720Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Millard DR (1958) Extensions of the rotation-advancement principle for wide unilateral cleft lips. Plast Reconstr Surg 42(6):535–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Delaire J (1978) Theoretical principles and technique of functional closure of the lip and nasal aperture. J Maxillofac Surg 6(2):109–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schendel SA, Delaire J (1981) Functional musculoskeletal correction of secondary unilateral cleft lip deformities: combined lip-nose correction and Le Fort I osteotomy. J Maxillofac Surg 9(2):108–116CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hurwitz DJ, Ashby ER, Llull R et al (1999) Computer-assisted anthropometry for outcome assessment of cleft lip. Plast Reconstr Surg 103(6):1608–1623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nagy K, Mommaerts MY (2007) Analysis of the cleft-lip nose in submental-vertical view. Part I—reliability of a new measurement instrument. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 35(6-7):265–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Reddy SG, Devarakonda V, Reddy RR (2013) Assessment of nostril symmetry after primary cleft rhinoplasty in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41(2):147–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Henningsson G, Kuehn DP, Sell D, Sweeney T, Trost-Cardamone JE, Whitehill TL (2008) Universal parameters for reporting speech outcomes in individuals with cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 45(1):1–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grayson BH, Cutting CB (2001) Pre-surgical nasoalveolar orthopedic molding in primary correction of the nose, lip, and alveolus of infants born with unilateral and bilateral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 38(3):193–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Santiago PE, Grayson BH, Cutting CB et al (1998) Reduced need for alveolar bone grafting by pre-surgical orthopedics and primary gingivoperiosteoplasty. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 35(1):77–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lecturer of Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryFaculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityAlexandriaEgypt

Personalised recommendations