Comparison of the Effects of Postoperative Arm Restraints and Mittens on Cleft Lip Scar Quality after Primary Repair.

Introduction: Postoperative management following primary cleft lip repair varies across institutions, cleft care teams, and individual surgeons. Postoperative precautions employed after cleft lip repair include dietary restrictions, pacifier limitations, and immobilization, with arm restraints long being used. Yet, restraint distress has led to the exploration of other forms of immobilization. Thus, this study aims to assess cleft lip scar quality and complication rates after postoperative immobilization with arm restraints versus hand mittens. Methods: A retrospective review of patients with unilateral cleft who underwent primary repair with the senior surgeon was done. Data on demographics, surgical characteristics, and immobilization utilized were gathered. A survey with pictures of postoperative scars were sent to laypeople who assessed scar quality with Modified Scar-Rating Scale scores for surface appearance, height, and color of the scar tissue. Statistical analysis was carried out for significance. Results: Twenty-eight patients with a unilateral cleft underwent arm restraints after primary lip repair, and twenty-seven utilized mittens. In total, 42 medical students completed the scar assessment. Photographs were taken an average of 23.9 (±5.8) and 28.2 (±11.9) months postoperatively in the restraint and mitten groups, respectively (p = 0.239). There were no statistically significant differences in scores between scar surface, height, color, or overall scar appearance. Complication rates were also similar between groups. Conclusions: Arm restraints appear to have no additional benefit relative to scar quality, as compared to mittens. Considering the arm restraints' burden of care, mittens should be considered as a measure to protect the lip after primary repair.

An Innovative Technique of Presurgical Lip, Alveolus, and Nose Approximation (PLANA) for Infants with Clefts.

The innovative technique of "presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation" (PLANA) offers a new approach within the domain of presurgical infant orthopedics for infants born with cleft lip and palate. Presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation introduces the utilization of the NoseAlign device in conjunction with medical adhesive tapes, designed to approximate and support displaced soft tissue nasolabial structures in patients with cleft, without an intraoral plate. The NoseAlign device, constructed from medical-grade silicone, consists of 2 tubular portions that fit into the nostrils, connected by a columella band. Notably, it also features a wave-shaped and curved horizontal lip band, resting on the upper lip, with elastic clasps for secure attachment to the face with medical adhesive tapes. Presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation therapy employs the NoseAlign device to support the collapsed nasal alar rim and cartilage, the displaced columella, the deviated nasal septum, and the displaced nasal alar base. This innovative approach minimizes the need for frequent office visits, making it particularly suitable for patients residing at a distance from specialized cleft centers. The prefabricated NoseAlign device offers effective support to nasal structures, making it suitable for unilateral and bilateral clefts. Importantly, the absence of an intraoral plate ensures it does not interfere with feeding. Presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation therapy, initiated as early as 1 to 2 weeks, leverages the plasticity of nasal soft tissue and cartilage to achieve the desired nasal form before primary surgery. Although presurgical lip, alveolus, and nose approximation therapy does have some limitations, particularly in cases of medially collapsed alveolar segments, its simplicity, universal applicability, and patient-friendliness make it a promising technique in the presurgical infant orthopedics field.

The Burden of Care of Nasoalveolar Molding: An Institutional Experience.

Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is an early presurgical intervention to facilitate primary cleft lip repair by reducing cleft severity and improving labial and nasal form. However, it continues to be associated with the burden of care that influences access and completion of therapy. The authors, therefore, aim to determine the burden of care of NAM therapy for families seeking treatment at a high-volume urban cleft center. A retrospective study of all patients undergoing primary cleft repair between 2012 and 2020 was performed. Patients were grouped based on whether or not NAM therapy was offered. Variables including physical, psychosocial, and financial factors were assessed. Two hundred and thirty patients underwent primary cleft repair between 2012 and 2020. Of these, 176 patients were indicated for NAM, with 4% discontinuing, and 54 patients did not undergo NAM. The 169 patients who completed NAM had a mean duration of treatment of 13.6±8.8 wks consisting of 15±6 scheduled NAM adjustment visits and 1±1 unscheduled visit made urgently to assess caregiver concerns. The mean travel distance was 28.6±37.1 miles. Eighty-four percent of caregivers were married, and 16% did not have English as a primary language. Though 57% had private insurance, 43% of patients received charity support for their treatment. NAM is a finite presurgical intervention that requires caregivers to participate in patient care for approximately three months of their early life. The decision to pursue NAM should be considered alongside the burden of care for caregivers to complete treatment.

Defining the Treatment Gap in Nasoalveolar Molding: Factors Affecting the Utilization of NAM in an Urban Cleft Center.

BACKGROUND: Many cleft centers incorporate NasoAlveolar Molding (NAM) into their presurgical treatment protocols. However, there are limited data on eligible patients who do not receive or complete NAM. This study characterizes the demographics associated with non-utilization or completion of NAM. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review was performed of all patients with cleft lip and alveolus undergoing primary unilateral and bilateral cleft lip repair from 2012-2020. Patients were grouped based on utilization or non-utilization of NAM. Demographic and treatment data were collected, including documented reasons for not pursuing or completing NAM. RESULTS: Of 230 eligible patients, 61 patients (27%) did not undergo or complete NAM (no-NAM). In this group, 37 (60.7%) received no presurgical intervention, 12 (19.7%) received presurgical nostril retainers, 3 (4.9%) received lip taping, 1 (1.6%) received a combination of taping/nostril retainers, and 8 (13.1%) discontinued NAM. The most common reasons for not receiving NAM were sufficiently aligned cleft alveolus (21.3%), medical complexity (16.4%), late presentation (16.4%), and alveolar notching (18%). Compared to the NAM group, the no-NAM group had significantly lower rates of prenatal cleft diagnosis/consult, and significantly higher proportion of non-married and non-English speaking caregivers. Multivariable analysis controlling for insurance type, primary language, prenatal consult, marital status, and age at first appointment found that age at first appointment is the only statistically significant predictor of NAM utilization (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Common reasons for non-utilization of NAM include well-aligned cleft alveolus, medical complexity, and late presentation. Early presentation is an important modifiable factor affecting rates of NAM utilization.