The Skoog Lip Repair for Unilateral Cleft Lip Deformity: The Uppsala Experience

Gingivoperiosteoplasty in Children with Cleft Lip and Palate: The Need for Alveolar Bone Grafting

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the efficacy of gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) in preventing alveolar bone grafting (ABG) among children with cleft lip and palate (CLP).

DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective university hospital single center study.

PATIENTS

Children with CLP treated with GPP from 2000-2015 were included. Those under eight years of age, without definitive conclusions regarding need for ABG or with incomplete data were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

Included patients were analyzed for demographics, cleft type, age at GPP, associated cleft surgery, use of nasoalveolar molding (NAM), indication for ABG, operating surgeon and presence of residual alveolar fistula. T-tests and Fisher's exact tests were utilized for statistical analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The need for ABG.

RESULTS

Of the 1682 children identified with CLP, 64 underwent GPP and met inclusion criteria. 78% of patients with CLP who underwent GPP were recommended for ABG. Those who received GPP at a younger age (P = .004) and at the time of initial cleft lip repair (P = .022) were less likely to be recommended for ABG. Patients with complete CLP were more likely to be recommended for ABG than patients with cleft lip and alveolus only (P = .015). The operating surgeon impacted the likelihood of ABG (P = .004). Patient gender, race, ethnicity, laterality, and NAM were not significantly associated with recommendation for ABG.

CONCLUSION

GPP does not preclude the need for ABG. Therefore, the success of ABG after GPP and maxillary growth restriction should be analyzed further to determine if GPP is a worthwhile adjunct to ABG in cleft care.

Longitudinal Morphological Changes in the Mucosal Free Margin After Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair

Weakness of the mucosal free margin is common in secondary cleft lip deformities. However, the incidence is rarely reported after a long-term follow-up. We evaluated the evolution of patient mucosal free margin after primary repair and until the end of growth.

Blinded retrospective study (photography and chart reviews).

Tertiary care hospital; private practice.

Forty-eight patients with unilateral cleft lip with or without cleft palate who underwent primary nasolabial repair between 1996 and 2004 were followed up until their end of growth marked at 18 and 16 years of age for male and female patients, respectively.

Primary nasolabial repair using a straight-line closure without a triangular flap on the vermilion was performed; if needed, a revision surgery was performed at 5 years of age (85%).

The contour of the mucosal free margin was classified into nodular, smooth, and recessed types at 1, 5, and 10 years and at the end of growth.

At 1 year of age, the nodular type was more common (58%). However, the recessed type was more common (75%) at the end of growth. The mucosal free margin continued to change after 10 years of age. At the end of growth, half of the patients with incomplete cleft experienced center weakness, and the others had cleft-side weaknesses.

Patients with incomplete clefts showed favorable results at early ages. However, two-thirds of the patients with complete and incomplete clefts showed focal weakness at the end of growth.

Patient Reported Outcome Following the Skoog Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair among Adults- a Long-Term Cohort Study and Comparison to a Non-cleft Population

OBJECTIVE

The study primarily aimed to compare satisfaction with lip appearance among adults treated for unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) with Skoog's primary lip repair procedure to those without clefts. The secondary aim was to determine whether satisfaction with lip appearance and the desire to change the lip/face appearance correlated with the number of secondary lip revisions performed.

DESIGN

Long-term follow-up.

PATIENTS/SETTINGS

All UCLP patients treated at the Uppsala University Hospital born between 1960- and 1987 (n  =  109) were invited. At an average of 37 years following the primary lip repair, the participation rate was 76% (n  =  83). A control group of adults without cleft (n  =  67) completed the same study protocol for comparison.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Satisfaction with appearance was measured with The Satisfaction with Appearance Questionnaire (SWA) and a modified version of the Body Cathexis -Scale was used to assess the desire to change the lip and facial appearance.

RESULTS

UCLP patients were less satisfied with their lip, face, and overall appearance and reported a greater desire to change the appearance of their lips and face than non-cleft controls (p < 0.001). Dissatisfaction with lip appearance correlated to a greater willingness to change the appearance of the lip and face. No correlation was found between satisfaction with appearance and the number of the previously performed secondary lip revisions.

CONCLUSION

Adults treated for UCLP are less satisfied with the appearance of their lips compared to the non-cleft population. The number of secondary revisions does not necessarily correlate to greater satisfaction with lip appearance.

Nasolabial Revisions in Unilateral Incomplete Cleft Lip: One Surgeon's 28-Year Experience

BACKGROUND

Repair of unilateral incomplete cleft lip is the surgeon's opportunity to achieve a superior result with few revisions.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of consecutive patients with unilateral incomplete cleft lip, defined as a defect extending 30 to 90 percent of cutaneous labial height, treated between 1985 and 2013 by one surgeon. Rates and types of revisions were collected, and photographs of patients who did not have a revision were reviewed to determine whether a revision was needed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-six patients met inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven percent needed revision of the mucosal free margin; less than 10 percent needed other minor labial revisions. Fifteen percent required a nasal revision, most commonly reelevation of the lower lateral cartilage. Over time, the only statistically significant change in frequency was increased revisions of the free border.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal revision rates are low in unilateral incomplete cleft lip compared to complete forms in previously published data by the senior author (J.B.M.). In contrast, labial revisions of the free margin are more common. The reason is that the surgeon became more cognizant of vermilion-mucosal deficiency on the noncleft side and more likely to offer a submucosal flap or dermis-fat graft to level the lip for normal upper incisor show.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Autologous Fat Transplantation to Improve Lip Contour in Secondary Cleft Lip Deformity

The insufficient volume of lip is one of the pathological problems of cleft lip, despite that the cleft lip the muscles and skin are repositioned. Autologous fat is an ideal material for soft tissue repair, including correction of contour deformity, restoration of volume insufficient, and even improvement of tissue characteristics. In this study, the authors evaluated the result of fat grafting in improvement of lip contour in secondary cleft lip deformity. The authors performed a retrospective analysis of their series of patients who underwent lip fat grafting. A total of 65 subjects with lip fat grafting for cleft lip revision were recruited for the study. The photographs documented the original malformation and the posttreatment photographs. The authors recruited female and male raters, who were experts in the field or lay persons to form a panel of 12 raters altogether. Symmetry and aesthetics were improved after fat grafting based on vermillion border (P = 0.02), symmetry of lip (P = 0.007), and nasal profile including upper lip (P = 0.04) using a 1- to 5-point scale. After treatment, both sides of the lip are more symmetrical, the thickness of the filling part is significantly increased, the filling area is soft, the appearance is satisfied. Fat grafting is an efficient secondary procedure to improve lip contour after cleft lip repairs.

Incidence of Secondary Lip Correction for Children With Unilateral Cleft Lip: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Numerous reports have described the incidence of secondary lip correction for patients with cleft lip (CL), and this incidence broadly varies among centers. The purpose of this study was to determine this revision rate for a reasonably large number of patients in our center and identify the clinical factors that contribute to the revision rate.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted for all infants with unilateral CL with or without cleft palate who underwent primary cheiloplasty at our cleft center from 2006 to 2012. Four surgeons were in charge of almost all operations. We investigated how many children underwent lip revisions by the end of 2017.

RESULTS

In total, 490 infants underwent primary lip repair, and 47 underwent revision surgery by the age of 8 years. Half of them (24 children) underwent revisions at the age of 5 or 6 years. There was no significant difference in the revision rate by sex or cleft side. The revision rate in children with CL only tended to be lower than that in children with alveolar cleft or cleft palate, but it was not significantly associated with the cleft type. The revision rate ranged from 2.8% to 15.2% among surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall revision rate was 9.6%, which is relatively lower than that in other cleft centers. However, the repair technique and cleft care program should not be evaluated using the revision rate only. Various factors, including surgeons' preference, contribute to the indications for revision, and these factors can change with age. We plan to follow up the patients until our completion of the cleft care program and report the final revision rate.