Symptoms of Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Nasal Obstruction, and Enuresis in Children With Nonsyndromic Cleft Lip and Palate: A Prevalence Study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of symptoms of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), nasal obstruction, and enuresis in children with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Referral care center. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-four children aged 6 to 12 years of both genders. INTERVENTIONS: Symptoms of OSA and nasal obstruction were investigated by analysis of scores obtained by the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC) and Congestion Quantifier (CQ-5). Enuresis was considered as present when urinary loss was reported during sleep (at least 1 episode/month, last 3 months). To characterize the enuresis as mono- or polysymptomatic, symptoms of dysfunction of the lower urinary tract (DLUT) were investigated by the Dysfunctional Voiding Scoring System (DVSS). Statistical analysis was performed at a 5% level of significance. RESULTS: Positive SDSC scores for OSA were observed in 60 (34%) children; positive CQ-5 scores for nasal obstruction in 45 (26%), positive DVSS scores for DLUT in 30 (17%), and enuresis was reported by 29 (17%), being categorized as primary in 66% and polysymptomatic in 72% of the children. Compared to the pediatric population, OSA, nasal obstruction, and enuresis prevalence ratios were up to 7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5-9), 2 (95% CI 2-3), and 3 times (95% CI 2-5) higher, respectively. There was a positive/moderate correlation between symptoms of OSA and nasal obstruction ( P = .0001). No correlation was seen between symptoms of OSA and enuresis. CONCLUSIONS: Children with nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate have high prevalence of nasal obstruction and enuresis and are at risk of OSA.

Comparative analysis of velopharyngeal activity assessed by acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry.

PURPOSE: To analyze the velopharyngeal (VP) activity of subjects with velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) by acoustic rhinometry, as compared to rhinomanometry. METHODS: This was a prospective clinical study conducted in 41 adults, both genders, with repaired cleft palate, with or without a previously repaired cleft lip, and residual VPD on clinical assessment, without compensatory articulations for [p], [t], and [k]. The outcome measures were as follows: (1) on acoustic rhinometry, nasopharyngeal volumetric change (ΔV) during [p], [t], and [k], relatively to rest condition (decreases by <3 cm3 considered as absence of VP activity); (2) on modified anterior rhinomanometry, VP orifice area (areas ≥0.05 cm2 considered as inadequate closure). The plosive [p] was used when comparing the techniques (n=24). RESULTS: (1) A mean ΔV decrease of 18% was observed during [k], which was significantly lower (p<0.05) than the decrease reported for individuals without VPD (30%). ΔV values suggesting VPD were observed in 59% subjects. Similar results were obtained for [p] and [t], which shall be used as stimulus, given that they do not involve the use of the tongue to lift the velum during VP closure, differently from the velar plosive [k]. (2) Inadequate closure was seen in 85% subjects. No correlation was observed between ∆V and VP orifice area. Agreement between techniques was observed in 51% cases. CONCLUSION: Acoustic rhinometry had low accuracy as a diagnostic method of VPD when compared to the gold standard method. Nevertheless, the technique shows potential as a method for monitoring the outcomes of clinical and surgical treatment of VPD aimed at increasing velar and pharyngeal activity.

Análise comparativa da atividade velofaríngea aferida por rinometria acústica e rinomanometria / Comparative analysis of velopharyngeal activity assessed by acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry

RESUMO Objetivo: Analisar a atividade velofaríngea (VF) de indivíduos com disfunção velofaríngea (DVF) aferida por rinometria acústica, comparativamente à rinomanometria. Métodos: Estudo clínico prospectivo em 41 adultos, de ambos os gêneros, com fissura de palato±lábio previamente operada e DVF residual ao exame clínico, sem articulação compensatória nas plosivas surdas [p], [t] e [k]. Variáveis analisadas: (1) variação volumétrica da nasofaringe (∆V) na produção das três plosivas, relativamente ao repouso, por rinometria acústica (reduções <3 cm3 foram consideradas como ausência de atividade velofaríngea); (2) área do orifício velofaríngeo (área VF), por rinomanometria anterior modificada; áreas ≥0,05 cm2 foram consideradas como fechamento inadequado. Na comparação das técnicas foi utilizada a plosiva [p] (n=24). Resultados: Observou-se: (1) ∆V médio de 18% no [k], significantemente menor (p<0,05) que a redução relatada para normais (30%); valores de ∆V sugestivos de DVF constatados em 59% dos casos. Resultados similares foram obtidos no [p] e [t], mostrando-se mais apropriados para o exame rinométrico, por não envolverem a participação da língua no fechamento velofaríngeo, diferentemente da plosiva velar [k]; (2) fechamento VF inadequado em 85% dos casos. Não houve correlação significativa entre o ∆V e a área do orifício velofaríngeo. A concordância de diagnóstico entre os métodos ocorreu em 51% dos casos. Conclusão: A rinometria acústica não apresentou boa acurácia como método de diagnóstico da DVF frente ao método padrão. Demonstrou, contudo, potencial como método de acompanhamento dos resultados de intervenções clínico-cirúrgicas que levem à maior atividade velar e faríngea.

ABSTRACT Purpose: To analyze the velopharyngeal (VP) activity of subjects with velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD) by acoustic rhinometry, as compared to rhinomanometry. Methods: This was a prospective clinical study conducted in 41 adults, both genders, with repaired cleft palate, with or without a previously repaired cleft lip, and residual VPD on clinical assessment, without compensatory articulations for [p], [t], and [k]. The outcome measures were as follows: (1) on acoustic rhinometry, nasopharyngeal volumetric change (ΔV) during [p], [t], and [k], relatively to rest condition (decreases by <3 cm3 considered as absence of VP activity); (2) on modified anterior rhinomanometry, VP orifice area (areas ≥0.05 cm2 considered as inadequate closure). The plosive [p] was used when comparing the techniques (n=24). Results: (1) A mean ΔV decrease of 18% was observed during [k], which was significantly lower (p<0.05) than the decrease reported for individuals without VPD (30%). ΔV values suggesting VPD were observed in 59% subjects. Similar results were obtained for [p] and [t], which shall be used as stimulus, given that they do not involve the use of the tongue to lift the velum during VP closure, differently from the velar plosive [k]. (2) Inadequate closure was seen in 85% subjects. No correlation was observed between ∆V and VP orifice area. Agreement between techniques was observed in 51% cases. Conclusion: Acoustic rhinometry had low accuracy as a diagnostic method of VPD when compared to the gold standard method. Nevertheless, the technique shows potential as a method for monitoring the outcomes of clinical and surgical treatment of VPD aimed at increasing velar and pharyngeal activity.