The double-opposing buccal flap procedure for palatal lengthening.

BACKGROUND: Velopharyngeal dysfunction has been treated with either a pharyngeal flap or sphincteroplasty with varying degrees of success. Both of these entities have their own series of problems, with sleep apnea and nasal mucous flow disruptions at the forefront. The purpose of this study was to review the senior author's (R.J.M.) experience performing the double-opposing buccal flap for palatal lengthening. METHODS: All patients who were treated with double-opposing buccal flaps between October of 1994 and July of 2007 were reviewed. These patients presented with varying degrees of velopharyngeal dysfunction showing some degree of velar movement at the time of surgery. Preoperative and postoperative speech results were reviewed for comparison. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients underwent palatal lengthening, with an average length of follow-up of 58 months. Distal flap necrosis occurred in two patients. The level of intelligibility (65.4 percent versus 95.5 percent) and resonance (moderately hypernasal versus normal resonance) improved significantly postoperatively (p < 0.0001). Only one patient required the addition of a pharyngeal flap for persistent velopharyngeal dysfunction, and there were no postoperative issues with sleep apnea. CONCLUSIONS: The double-opposing buccal flap is an effective technique for lengthening the palate, improving speech, and decreasing the risks of postoperative sleep apnea. All patients experienced a dramatic improvement in their resonance and intelligibility. This technique appears most effective in patients with intact velar movement who demonstrate a small to moderate posterior velar gap. The double-opposing buccal flap is a useful means of treating velopharyngeal dysfunction, thus serving as an adjunct when improving pharyngeal closure.

Plastic surgery chief resident clinics: the current state of affairs.

BACKGROUND: One of the goals of plastic surgery residency programs is to provide effective training in aesthetic surgery. Recently, programs have adopted the idea of chief clinics to provide senior residents with the opportunity to perform cosmetic surgery with an increased level of autonomy. The goal of this article is to characterize chief clinics currently in place and their usefulness in providing effective training in plastic surgery under the precepts set forth by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. METHODS: A survey was created focusing on six broad categories: respondent identifier, clinic structure, clinic monetary earnings, patient demographics, procedures, and educational utility. Surveys were distributed to all plastic surgery residency programs targeting current and recently graduated chief residents, and program directors. RESULTS: A total of 123 surveys were returned. Eighty of the 88 plastic surgery residency programs (91 percent) were represented. Of the programs responding, 71.3 percent (57 programs) had a chief resident clinic. Thirty-two of the respondents (43.8 percent) reported that 100 percent of the procedures performed were cosmetic in nature. Programs differed widely on their frequency of occurrence and support staff available. A majority of respondents felt these clinics enhanced resident understanding of the six Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of plastic surgery training programs use the chief clinic model to enhance resident education. These clinics vary in makeup and case distribution but serve as an effective way of teaching autonomy, surgical maturity, and the six Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies.