A Comparative Assessment of Nasal Appearance following Nasoalveolar Molding and Primary Surgical Repair for Treatment of Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate

Use it or Lose it: Predictors of Compliance and Satisfaction With Postoperative Nasal Stent Therapy After Primary Cleft Lip Repair

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative nasal stents (NSs) are used to improve esthetic outcomes after primary or secondary cleft lip repair (CLR). Prior studies have utilized anthropometric measurements or physician assessment to determine the efficacy of NS, but data on caregiver-reported outcomes is limited. This study aims to assess caregiver compliance and satisfaction with postoperative NS.

METHODS

The authors designed a survey to collect parent-reported postoperative NS usage outcomes. Parents of infants with cleft lip (CL) who used postoperative NS after primary CLR were approached through social media to complete the survey. Data were analyzed to determine factors impacting compliance, satisfaction, and parent-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighty-five parents completed the questionnaire, and 60% reported noncompliance with NS. Parents with male children (odds ratio: 5.08, P = 0.019) and patients with incomplete CL (odds ratio: 5.72, P = 0.006) were more likely to be non-compliant with NS for over a week. Complete CL and use of presurgical molding therapy were each associated with better overall experience with postoperative NS ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.037), higher appearance ratings ( P = 0.005 and P = 0.0008), and greater satisfaction with nostril shape after surgery ( P = 0.016 and P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite limited literature related to caregiver-reported outcomes after postoperative NS for primary CLR, the authors' results align with what has been published regarding this topic. These results can help guide surgeons in counseling patients preoperatively. Larger, multi-institutional studies are needed to better delineate and address factors associated with compliance and satisfaction after NS therapy.

Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of the Evidence Base for Nasoalveolar Molding (NAM)

OBJECTIVE

To critically appraise the body of scientific literature supporting the risks and efficacy of nasoalveolar molding (NAM), specifically in contrast to alternative methods of presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO) or to treatment without PSIO.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Five outcome domains were considered: nasolabial aesthetics; dentoalveolar relationship; midfacial growth; cost and burden of care; and number of anesthetic events.

DESIGN

MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were queried for articles from the first description of the Grayson-Santiago NAM technique (1993) through December 13, 2021. After the application of inclusionary and exclusionary criteria, selected articles were critically appraised using a systematic framework that included risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools.

RESULTS

A total of 88 studies were included. Level-I and -II evidence showed on par or better approximation and alveolar alignment achieved by NAM compared to other PSIO. Level-II and -III evidence showed improved nasolabial aesthetics compared to other PSIOs. Level-II and -III evidence supported no harm to maxillofacial skeletal growth through age 12. Sparse level-III evidence supported a reduced number of labial or nasal revisions following NAM. Level-II and -III evidence showed NAM requiring upfront cost and frequent appointments but reducing caregiver psychosocial burden and reducing long-term costs compared to select alternatives. Many studies carried a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the overall efficacy of NAM regarding short/mid-term outcomes, with a low risk of negative effects on midfacial growth or dental development. The high risk of bias discovered in many papers underscores the need for robust study design in future research.

Clinical Outcomes of Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Repair with Nasoalveolar Molding and Gingivoperiosteoplasty to Facial Maturity

BACKGROUND

The long-term effects of nasoalveolar molding (NAM) on patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) are unknown. The authors report clinical outcomes of facially mature patients with complete BCLP who underwent NAM and gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP).

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective study of nonsyndromic patients with complete BCLP who underwent NAM between 1991 and 2000 was performed. All study patients were followed to skeletal maturity, at which time a lateral cephalogram was obtained. The total number of cleft operations and cephalometric measures was compared with a previously published external cohort of patients with complete and incomplete BCLP in which a minority (16.7%) underwent presurgical orthopedics before cleft lip repair without GPP.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients with BCLP comprised the study cohort. All patients underwent GPP, 13 (54.2%) underwent alveolar bone graft, and nine (37.5%) required speech surgery. The median number of operations per patient was five (interquartile range, two), compared with eight (interquartile range, three) in the external cohort ( P < 0.001). Average age at the time of lateral cephalogram was 18.64 years (1.92). There was no significant difference between our cohort and the external cohort with respect to sella-nasion-point A angle (SNA) [73 degrees (6 degrees) versus 75 degrees (11 degrees); P = 0.186] or sella-nasion-point B angle (SNA) [78 degrees (6 degrees) versus 74 degrees (9 degrees); P = 0.574]. Median ANB (SNA - SNB) was -3 degrees (5 degrees) compared with -1 degree (7 degrees; P = 0.024). Twenty patients (83.3%) underwent orthognathic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patients with BCLP who underwent NAM and GPP had significantly fewer total cleft operations and mixed midface growth outcomes at facial maturity compared with patients who did not undergo this treatment protocol.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Updates in Cleft Care

Cleft lip and/or palate is a congenital malformation with a wide range of presentations, and its effective treatment necessitates sustained, comprehensive care across an affected child's life. Early diagnosis, ideally through prenatal imaging or immediately postbirth, is paramount. Access to longitudinal care and long-term follow-up with a multidisciplinary approach, led by the recommendations of the American Cleft Palate Association, is the best way to ensure optimal outcomes. Multiple specialties including plastic surgery, otolaryngology, speech therapy, orthodontists, psychologists, and audiologists all may be indicated in the care of the child. Primary repair of the lip, nose, and palate are generally conducted during infancy. Postoperative care demands meticulous oversight to detect potential complications. If necessary, revisional surgeries should be performed before the child begin primary school. As the child matures, secondary procedures like alveolar bone grafting and orthognathic surgery may be requisite. The landscape of cleft care has undergone significant transformation since early surgical correction, with treatment plans now tailored to the specific type and severity of the cleft. The purpose of this text is to outline the current standards of care in children born with cleft lip and/or palate and to highlight ongoing advancements in the field.

Advances in Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery

Cleft lip with or without cleft palate is one of the most common congenital malformations, with an average prevalence of 1 in 1000 live births. Cleft lip and/or palate is incredibly phenotypically diverse, with constant advancements and refinements in how we care for patients. This article presents an in-depth review of the latest advances and current evidence in cleft lip and palate surgery. This includes presurgical infant orthopedics, perioperative practice patterns including use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols, patient-reported outcome measures, and the latest adjuncts in cheiloplasty and palatoplasty.

Stability of nasal symmetry following primary cleft lip and nasal repair: five years of follow-up

Despite advances in cleft lip treatment, various levels of residual deformity remain after primary repair of cleft lip and palate. The aim of the current study was to compare the stability of short- and long-term postoperative nasal symmetry. This retrospective study included 100 consecutive non-syndromic patients with unilateral complete cleft lip who underwent primary cleft lip repair with follow-up of 5 years. Measurements taken from basal and frontal standard photograph views, obtained preoperatively (T1) and immediately (T2), 1 year (T3), and 5 years postoperative (T4), were analysed. Paired and independent t-tests were applied to assess the significance of differences and relationships, while the inter-class correlation coefficient was used to assess reliability; P < 0.05 was considered significant. The male to female ratio was 1:1; mean age at the time of surgery was 0.43 ± 0.25 years. All patients showed significant improvements following unilateral complete cleft lip repair. All variables measured at T3 revealed a significant relapse when compared to T2, except alar base position, which showed a constant mean across all postoperative follow-ups. Late relapse (T3-T4) was not significant for alar collapse, alar base position, or columellar angle (all P > 0.05). On the other hand, columellar height (P = 0.003), and nostril height (P = 0.038) and width (P = 0.007) showed significant improvements during the late relapse period. In conclusion, the majority of the relapse and changes following the nasal cleft repair occurred within the first postoperative year. However, nasal asymmetries tended to remain stable or reduced during the first 5 postoperative years.