Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Treatment of Patients with Cleft Lip, Alveolus, and Palate: An Executive Summary.

Significant treatment variation exists in the Netherlands between teams treating patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and/or palate, resulting in a confusing and undesirable situation for patients, parents, and practitioners. Therefore, to optimize cleft care, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) were developed. The aim of this report is to describe CPG development, share the main recommendations, and indicate knowledge gaps regarding cleft care. Together with patients and parents, a multidisciplinary working group of representatives from all relevant disciplines assisted by two experienced epidemiologists identified the topics to be addressed in the CPGs. Searching the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases identified 5157 articles, 60 of which remained after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. We rated the quality of the evidence from moderate to very low. The working group formulated 71 recommendations regarding genetic testing, feeding, lip and palate closure, hearing, hypernasality, bone grafting, orthodontics, psychosocial guidance, dentistry, osteotomy versus distraction, and rhinoplasty. The final CPGs were obtained after review by all stakeholders and allow cleft teams to base their treatment on current knowledge. With high-quality evidence lacking, the need for additional high-quality studies has become apparent.

Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Young Adults Treated for Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip, Alveolus, and Palate by a Treatment Protocol Including Two-Stage Palatoplasty: Speech Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: No consensus exists on the optimal treatment protocol for orofacial clefts or the optimal timing of cleft palate closure. This study investigated factors influencing speech outcomes after two-stage palate repair in adults with a non-syndromal complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with a UCLP who underwent two-stage palate closure and were treated at our tertiary cleft centre. Patients ≥17 years of age were invited for a final speech assessment. Their medical history was obtained from their medical files, and speech outcomes were assessed by a speech pathologist during the follow-up consultation. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 21 years (standard deviation, 3.4 years). Their mean age at the time of hard and soft palate closure was 3 years and 8.0 months, respectively. In 40% of the patients, a pharyngoplasty was performed. On a 5-point intelligibility scale, 84.4% received a score of 1 or 2; meaning that their speech was intelligible. We observed a significant correlation between intelligibility scores and the incidence of articulation errors (P<0.001). In total, 36% showed mild to moderate hypernasality during the speech assessment, and 11%-17% of the patients exhibited increased nasalance scores, assessed through nasometry. CONCLUSIONS: The present study describes long-term speech outcomes after two-stage palatoplasty with hard palate closure at a mean age of 3 years old. We observed moderate long-term intelligibility scores, a relatively high incidence of persistent hypernasality, and a high pharyngoplasty incidence.

Long-Term Results of Mandibular Distraction Osteogenesis with a Resorbable Device in Infants with Robin Sequence: Effects on Developing Molars and Mandibular Growth.

BACKGROUND: Mandibular distraction osteogenesis with a unidirectional resorbable device is an effective treatment option for severe upper airway obstruction in infants with Robin sequence. Long-term effects, especially with regard to tooth development and mandibular outgrowth, are not known. METHODS: Robin sequence infants with a follow-up of greater than or equal to 5 years were included. Baseline characteristics were extracted from medical records. Panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs were analyzed and patients were recalled for physical examination. RESULTS: Ten infants underwent mandibular distraction osteogenesis at a mean age of 3.7 months (median, 19 months; range, 11 days to 27 months). Mean length of follow-up was 6.8 years (range, 5.0 to 7.9 years). Ten Robin sequence infants without mandibular distraction osteogenesis (mean length of follow-up, 7.4 years; range, 6.7 to 8.9 years) were the controls. Shape anomalies, positional changes, and root malformations of molars were seen significantly more often than in the control group (p = 0.007, p = 0.009, and p = 0.043, respectively). Mandibular length was shorter (p = 0.030), but mandibular ramus height was comparable (p = 0.838) with that of the non-mandibular distraction osteogenesis group. Compared with healthy controls, all Robin sequence infants had a significantly shorter mandible. CONCLUSIONS: Mandibular distraction osteogenesis with a resorbable system reveals overall good short- and long-term results, but the effects on developing molars and mandibular outgrowth likely necessitate secondary procedures. This factor should be considered when deciding on treatment options and counseling of parents. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.