Dental Protraction Versus Surgery for Cleft Lip and Palate: A Budget Impact Analysis.

Class III malocclusion for individuals with cleft lip and palate has historically been managed with surgery. Orthodontic protraction is a noninvasive alternative that may be associated with lower costs. This analysis investigated the budget impact of protraction versus surgery from an institutional perspective. Using a decision tree, analysis was conducted using costs derived from Medicaid reimbursement codes and using actual institutional reimbursement. Probabilities of success, failure, and complications were based on a clinical trial comparing the 2 treatment modalities. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of results to model parameters. Based on Medicaid fee schedules and failure rates requiring additional surgery, the total cost of protraction was $79,506 versus $172,807 for surgery, resulting in $93,302 cost-savings per patient. The cost and probability of surgery success, as well as the cost of surgery failure and repeat surgery, had the largest impact on these cost-savings. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed cost-savings of nearly $92,000 or higher in >50% of simulations. This study showed that protraction is associated with lower costs than surgery and may present a cost-effective alternative to surgery in eligible, appropriate patients.

Hospitalization Outcomes of Cleft Lip Repair in Neonates Across the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Cleft lip repair surgeries in neonates have shown to be effective and safe, resulting in less scarring and excellent aesthetic outcomes. However, existing studies are based on single-center experiences with limited numbers of patients and surgeons. Complication rates and hospital outcomes of neonatal lip repair have not yet been established at the national level. The objective of this study was to examine the association between age at cleft lip repair and hospital outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of hospital discharge database. SETTING: Nationwide Inpatient Sample for years 2004 through 2010. PATIENTS: Patients under 12 months of age diagnosed with cleft lip with or without cleft palate. INTERVENTIONS: Surgical repair for cleft lip. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Occurrence of complications. RESULTS: There were 10 132 cleft lip repair procedures in 2004-2010 in the United States. Mean age was 144 days with 2.1 days of hospital stay and $22 037 charges. Less than 2% were performed in neonates (0-28 days). The overall complication rate was 2.1%. Compared to 2-4 months, cleft lip procedures in neonates were associated with longer length of stay ( P = .001) and hospital charges ( P = .03). Cleft lip repair among neonates were 15 times more likely to develop complications ( P = .0004) even after adjusting for confounding factors. CONCLUSIONS: Cleft lip repair in neonates is associated with significantly higher complication rates as well as longer length of stay and more hospital charges. Purported benefits of neonatal cleft lip repair may not outweigh significant safety issues and hospitalization outcomes.

Clinicians and laypeople assessment of facial attractiveness in patients with cleft lip and palate treated with LeFort I surgery or late maxillary protraction.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the changes in the facial attractiveness (FA) in two groups of cleft lip and palate patients with Class III malocclusions treated using LeFort I surgery or late maxillary protraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized pre- and post-treatment photographs were taken of 32 patients (17 corrected by orthognathic surgery and 17 by late maxillary protraction). The photographs were randomized and 42 clinicians and 121 laypeople rated them on a 10-point FA scale via a web-based survey. RESULTS: Clinicians' mean FA values increased from 4.45 to 5.16 [95% CI of mean difference (MD), 0.59-0.82, p<0.001] in surgical cases and 4.84 to 5.30 (95% CI of MD, 0.35-0.56, p<0.001) in protraction cases. The laypeople mean FA values increased from 5.07 to 5.54 (95% CI of MD, 0.40-0.53, p<0.001) in surgical cases and 5.51 to 5.68 (95% CI of MD, 0.11-0.23, p<0.001) in protraction cases. When patients combined, laypeople rated FA 0.64 points higher (95% CI, 0.54-0.74, p<0.001) in pre-treatment and 0.38 points higher (95% CI, 0.27-0.48, p<0.05) in post-treatment relative to clinicians. CONCLUSION: Both clinicians and laypeople perceived an improvement of FA after both treatments. Laypeople rated FA higher compared to clinicians.