Important Aspects of Oral Lining in Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair

Three-Dimensional Measurement of the Lateral Lip Element Sacrificed in Primary Repair of a Unilateral Cleft Lip

BACKGROUND

In most children with a unilateral cleft lip (UCL), because lateral lip tissue on the cleft side is congenitally short, the lateral lip element should be appropriately excised during primary cheiloplasty so that symmetric nasolabial features are obtained after surgery. The purpose of this study was to measure how much of the lateral lip element is removed during primary cheiloplasty and compare the amount of sacrifice between different incision designs.

METHODS

Preoperative 3-dimensional images of 50 infants with UCL were randomly selected. The incision designs of 3 representative techniques (Millard, Onizuka, and Fisher) were drawn on the images that were obtained before the primary repair. The lateral lip tissue excised by each technique was estimated as a percentage of the surface area of the sacrificed lateral lip to the entire lateral lip of the cleft side.

RESULTS

In the case of incomplete UCL, the median values (range) were 3.2% (1.1%-5.9%), 11.6% (8.3%-20.1%), and 27.2% (15.1%-42.3%) for the Millard, Onizuka, and Fisher repairs, respectively. In cases of complete UCL, no sacrifice was needed for the Millard repair, whereas the median values (range) were 10.6% (5.2%-28.9%) and 22.5% (11.5%-48.6%) for the Onizuka and Fisher repairs, respectively. In Millard repair, the median values (range) of the lateral lip element that was resected before skin closure according to the "cut-as-you-go" policy were 5.8% (2.2%-11.8%) in cases with an incomplete UCL and 4.9% (2.7%-9.1%) in cases with a complete UCL.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that sacrifice of the lateral lip element was minimal in the Millard repair, whereas it could exceed 20% in the Fisher repair. However, additional sacrifice of the advancement flap was needed in the Millard-type repair. The ratio of the lateral lip sacrifice varied between patients. Although UCL repair techniques should not be evaluated with the sacrifice ratio, excessive sacrifice of the lateral lip tissue can complicate the secondary lip correction. We recommend that surgeons estimate preoperatively how much lateral lip element will be sacrificed with each incision design using a 3-dimensional image for each child with a UCL.

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.

[Secondary cheiloplasty in the treatment of cleft lip and palates]

In the course of treatment of cleft lip and palates, the quality of primary cheilo-rhinoplasty is essential to limit aesthetic and functional complications. This is why these primary reconstructions come under the domain of specialised centres with multidisciplinary teams. Unfortunately, residual imperfections often remain, especially in bilateral clefts, and secondary cheiloplasties represent for us a complex challenge. They aim at functional and aesthetic correction, and the choice of time is very random and depends largely on the psychological repercussions of the deformation in the child. It often occurs at the age of school entry and is combined with alveoloplasty. We then speak of alveolar transplantation with vestibulo and labio-plastie, the GPVP. Then we propose to combine all the resources of cosmetic surgery to improve the aesthetic and functional result of these children.

Anatomical Nasal Lining Flaps for Closure of the Nasal Floor in Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft Lip Repairs Reduce Fistulas at the Alveolus

BACKGROUND

Techniques vary for addressing the nasal floor during cleft lip repair in patients with a cleft lip and palate. Sometimes, no closure is performed, leaving a symptomatic alveolar fistula until the time of alveolar bone grafting. Often, medial and lateral skin flaps are used, but these are often thin and unreliable. Anatomical nasal lining flaps are used to improve closure with robust, well-vascularized flaps that anatomically close the nasal floor.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients with a unilateral or bilateral cleft lip and palate who underwent primary cleft lip repair with nasal lining flaps or with medial and lateral flaps. The primary outcome was presence of a symptomatic and/or visible oronasal fistula.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were included. Thirty-seven underwent closure with nasal lining flaps, whereas 27 underwent closure using Millard medial and lateral flaps. The rate of symptomatic/visible fistulas after cleft palate repair was 19 percent (seven of 37) for patients with nasal lining flaps and 44 percent (12 of 27) for patients with medial and lateral flaps (p = 0.0509, Fisher's exact test). The alveolar fistula rate was 3 percent (one of 37) for patients with nasal lining flaps and 30 percent (eight of 27) for patients with medial and lateral flaps (p = 0.0032, Fisher's exact test).

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal lining flaps at the time of cleft lip repair effectively close the anterior nasal floor in patients with a unilateral or bilateral cleft lip and palate. Decreasing the presence of alveolar fistulas after cleft palate repair improves the quality of life for patients with cleft deformities.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Anatomical Reconstruction of the Nasal Floor in Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair

BACKGROUND

Numerous methods exist for repairing unilateral cleft lips and mainly focus on cutaneous design to achieve sufficient rotation of the medial (M) cleft lip and produce a natural Cupid's bow and philtrum. However, precise nasal floor reconstruction has not been described in detail. This is the first study to introduce a technique for repairing complete unilateral cleft lips with a focus on nasal floor reconstruction.

METHODS

In our technique, "Straight-Line Advanced Release Technique (StART)," the nasal floor is considered a 3-dimensional cuboid structure; the M mucosal and lateral (L) mucosal flaps constituted the posterior surface. The M flap became the roof of the orbicularis oris muscle sling and the posterior side of the nasal lining. The B flap met the L lip flap at the superior border of the M flap, and together they formed the roof and anterior surface. The B flap also formed a transitional zone connecting the columella and nasal floor.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients with complete unilateral cleft lip were treated from 2003 to 2015. The difference in the height of the nostril sills between the cleft and non-cleft sides was not significantly different from that in control patients (P = 0.472) 1 year postoperatively. Twenty operations for secondary deformities were performed: 8 for nose deformities not involving the nasal floor. The transverse scar at the alar base was concealed within the nostril.

CONCLUSIONS

Nasal floor reconstruction is important in complete unilateral cleft lip repair. Our technique provides a naturally shaped, symmetrical nasal floor without conspicuous scarring.

The Burden of Care for Children with Unilateral Cleft Lip: A Systematic Review of Revision Surgery

Objective

To identify the average rate of revision surgery following cleft lip repair.

Design

PubMed, CINAHL, and SCOPUS were searched from database inception through March 2013 using the search terms cleft lip and surgery. Two investigators independently screened all abstracts and determined eligibility from review of full manuscripts using prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Strengths and limitation of the studies were assessed, followed by qualitative synthesis. The I2 test of homogeneity was performed to determine if meta-analysis was appropriate.

Results

The search identified 3034 articles. Of those, 45 met the inclusion criteria. Studies were primarily case series and retrospective cohort studies, with only one randomized controlled trial. One-third of studies (n = 15) did not describe how the study sample was selected. Follow-up duration was not reported in one-fourth of studies (n = 11). Nasolabial aesthetics were reported in 44% of studies (n = 20). The incidence of revision surgery ranged from 0% to 100%. Meta-analysis was precluded because of study heterogeneity (I2 = 97%).

Conclusions

The average incidence of cleft lip revision surgery cannot be estimated from the published literature, due to significant heterogeneity among existing reports and limited study quality. To provide valid information about the burden of care for unilateral cleft lip, a population-based or multicenter longitudinal cohort study is necessary; this study should measure the number of surgical procedures and the patient's aesthetic outcomes.

Cleft Crossing Medial Mucosal Flap for Deepening of the Gingivolabial Sulcus in a Complete Cleft Lip Repair

The aim of the present study is to introduce a method of which the medial mucosal flap is used in a deepening of the gingivolabial sulcus in a complete cleft lip repair. An incision was made on the lateral vestibular lining and the contracture was released. The defect produced was filled by transposing the lateral mucosal flap (l-flap). The transposed l-flap was sutured except for the proximal part of the lateral side. The medial mucosal flap (m-flap) was elevated with its base above on the alveolus. The m-flap was turned over and crossed over the cleft thereafter and the distal end of the m-flap was sutured to the proximal part of the lateral side of the l-flap. The width of the m-flap was 4 to 5 mm, and the length depended on the width of the cleft. The raw surface of the m-flap faced the outer side and was covered with the repaired muscle layer. Thereafter, the m-flap became a part of the deepened gingivolabial sulcus. A total of 12 patients (8 men, 4 women) with a unilateral complete cleft lip (left 9, right 3) were operated on using this technique and at least 2 mm deepening effect of upper gingivolabial sulcus was observed in 8 patients followed up. The authors think this cleft crossing medial mucosal flap technique may be of use in the primary repair of a unilateral cleft lip.