Maxillary Development and Dental Arch Relationships Following Early Two-Stage Palatoplasty: A Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine skeletal morphology and dental arch relationships at 8 years of age following early 2-stage palatoplasty, which consists of soft palate plasty at 1 year of age and hard palate closure at 1.5 years of age, and to compare the results with those of conventional pushback palatoplasty. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Single institutional study. PATIENTS: Eighty-six patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) were selected. INTERVENTION: The subjects were divided into 2 groups according to the palatoplasty protocols, as follows: 45 patients, who underwent early 2-stage palatoplasty (ETS group), and 41 patients, who underwent 1-stage pushback palatoplasty (PB group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Skeletal morphology was assessed using lateral cephalometric analysis, and dental arch relationships were examined using the GOSLON yardstick. RESULTS: Cephalometric analysis revealed that the anterior-posterior length of the maxilla, measured by PTM-A and PTM-ANS, both projected to the nasal floor (NF) plane, was longer in the ETS group than in the PB group (PTM-A/NF, p = .04; PTM-ANS/NF, p = .03, unpaired t-test), although no significant difference was observed in SNA (p = .09, unpaired t-test). Upper posterior facial height was shorter in the ETS group than in the PB group (p = .02, unpaired t). Assessments with the GOSLON yardstick showed that the ETS group presented better dental arch relationships than the PB group (p = 0.04, Mann-Whitney's U-test). CONCLUSIONS: The present results suggested that the ETS protocol reduced the negative effects of palatal surgery on facial development and dental arch relationships in patients with complete UCLP at 8 years of age.

Occlusion at 5 Years of Age Following Hard Palate Closure With Vestibular Flap.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess occlusal relationships and frequency of oronasal fistula at 5 years of age following 2 hard palate closure techniques and to compare results. DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal study. SETTING: Institutional study. PATIENTS: Study patients included 57 patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate who were consecutively treated. All patients underwent our early 2-stage protocol for palatoplasty, which consisted of soft palate plasty at 1 year of age and hard palate closure at 1.5 years of age. Twenty-nine patients underwent hard palate closure using vestibular flap (VF group) technique (2009-2011) and 28 patients underwent conventional hard palate closure with local palatal flap (LPF group) technique (2006-2008). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Occlusal relationships were assessed with 5-year-olds' index, and frequency of oronasal fistula was investigated. RESULTS: Average 5-year-olds' index scores for VF and LPF groups were 3.11 and 3.57, respectively (P < .001). Oronasal fistula occurred in approximately 7% of patients in the VF group and in 18% of patients in the LPF group. CONCLUSION: Hard palate closure with VF technique may provide better occlusal relationships at 5 years of age than does conventional local closure with the LPF.

Clinical outcomes of gingivoperiosteoplasty for unilateral cleft lip and palate performed in early childhood.

Conventional gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) performed during infancy adversely affects maxillary development. However, the outcomes of this procedure in early childhood have rarely been reported. Therefore, we examined the postoperative outcomes of GPP conducted in patients aged 1.5 years with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). This study included 87 non-syndromic patients with complete UCLP who had undergone early two-stage palatoplasty during the 1999-2004 period. The protocol comprised soft palate plasty at 1 year of age and hard palate closure at 1.5 years of age. In the GPP group (n = 34), we introduced the GPP procedure during hard palate closure; in the non-GPP group (n = 53), the labial side of the alveolar cleft remained intact. We examined computed tomography images taken at 8 years of age to observe bone formation at the alveolar cleft site. We also conducted cephalometric analysis to examine maxillary development at 12 years of age. Bone bridges at the alveolar cleft site were observed in 92% and 5.6% of the GPP and non-GPP groups, respectively. Moreover, 56% of the GPP group did not require secondary alveolar bone grafting (sABG), whereas all the patients in the non-GPP group underwent sABG. No statistically significant differences were noted in the maxillary anteroposterior length (GPP: 45.5 ± 3.7 mm, non-GPP: 45.9 ± 3.5 mm, p = 0.67) and sella-nasion-point A angle (GPP: 75.6 ± 4.5°, non-GPP: 73.8 ± 12.6°, p = 0.49). This study's findings suggest that GPP performed at 1.5 years of age minimises the necessity of sABG and does not exert a negative influence on maxillofacial development.