Skeletal and Dental Correction and Stability Following LeFort I Advancement in Patients With Cleft Lip and Palate With Mild, Moderate, and Severe Maxillary Hypoplasia

Speech following Le Fort I Maxillary Advancement in Cleft Maxillary hypoplasia - an objective and subjective outcome analysis

PURPOSE

To objectively evaluate the effect of maxillary advancement on speech and VPI using video-fluoroscopy (VFS), direct nasoendoscopy, and speech evaluation and subjectively assess patients and their peer's perception regarding their speech outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

27 cleft patients who underwent Lefort 1 maxillary advancement were divided into 2 groups- Group A with 4-7 mm of advancement and Group B with 8-13 mm advancement. VFS in lateral view, nasoendoscopy, and speech recordings were performed pre and 6 months postoperatively. VFS assessed the relative position of velum in relation to the pharyngeal wall, speech was evaluated for changes in nasal emission, resonance, and articulation along with nasal endoscopy to assess the overall function of the velopharyngeal valve. Subjective speech evaluation was done with a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure [PROM] questionnaire.

RESULTS

As per VFS, for every 1 mm maxillary advancement, the velopharyngeal gap at rest increased by 1.75 mm in group A and 1.58 mm in group B. The compensatory changes in group B were more pronounced. Post-operative VFS showed velar closure remained the same as preoperative closure in 86.7%, and worsened in 13.3% in group A whereas it remained unchanged in 66.7%, improved in 25%, and worsened in 8.3% in group B. In nasoendoscopy, the closure pattern showed no change in 86.6%, improved in 6.7%, and deteriorated in 8.3% in group A while there was no change in 83.4%, improved in 8.3%, and deteriorated in 8.3% in group B. Dental and labiodental articulation statistically improved [p < 0.05] after surgery. PROM reported 85.7% of patients with improved speech, 82.1% improved sound quality along with 89.3% improvement in articulation.

CONCLUSION

The primary cause for functional impairment and poor aesthetics in cleft deformity is the maxillary hypoplasia and therefore, should be the focus during correction. The pre-operative VP status or the amount of maxillary advancement could not predict the postoperative VP status. Maxillary advancement over 10 mm did not seem to significantly affect the final VP status. Articulation improves due to increased tongue space and favorable dental segment positioning. Mild to moderate immediate post op changes in nasality improves or even reverts to their preoperative status in the majority of the cases in about six months.

Alveolar Oral Layer Repair by Periosteal Grafts versus Maxillary Flaps and Gingivoperiosteoplasty: Techniques and Follow-up to Adolescence

Background

Alveolar periosteoplasty during primary repair of cleft lip is still a topic of debate due to the fear exacerbating maxillary retrusion. The authors present their experience with early closure of alveolar clefts. The study aims to analyze gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) by comparing the use of locoregional flaps versus distant grafts for reconstruction of the lower layer of the primary palate cleft.

Methods

Seventeen infants underwent 22 alveolar cleft repairs. After nasal floor repair by nasal mucoperiosteum, the oral layer was repaired by maxillary or gingival periosteal flaps in seven patients with alveolar clefts less than or equal to 6 mm wide, and tibial or pericranial periosteal grafts in 10 patients with wider clefts. At teenage years, crossbites in three flap-GPP and three graft-GPP patients were compared with nine older adolescents without primary GPP.

Results

Alveolar clefts were perfectly sealed. Radiographs during the early 3 postoperative years showed new bone formation more posteriorly extended in patients who underwent graft-GPP. Teeth eruption and alveolar rigidity at the mixed dentition age eliminated the need for secondary bone grafting. The anterior crossbites in adolescent patients ranged between -2 and -14 mm; crossing was relatively smaller in patients with a younger age and without cleft palate. The mean crossbite was 7.2 mm in the six teenagers and 9.6 mm in the control cases.

Conclusions

Graft-GPP may be a good alternative to flap-GPP, particularly for wide alveolar cleft repair. Maxillary retrusion is aggravated in patients with cleft palate and older age at assessment. GPP may not increase crossbite.

Comparative Evaluation of Relapse After LeFort 1 Osteotomy in Cleft Palate and Non-cleft Individuals: A Longitudinal Study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the likelihood of relapse one year after LeFort I advancement surgery in patients with and without cleft lip and palate.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study which included two groups of participants who underwent LeFort I maxillary advancement was performed. Group 1 included 10 non-cleft subjects and Group 2 included 21 subjects with cleft palate. These maxillary deficient patients were chosen and operated using a technique where only a sagittal displacement was intended. Patients who underwent additional mandibular surgery, significant vertical or transverse alterations, or both were excluded. Pre-operative (T1), immediately post-operative (T2), and minimum one-year follow-up (T3) lateral cephalograms were studied for each group. Skeletal stability and dental stability after LeFort I surgery at a minimum of one-year follow-up in cleft palate and non-cleft patients were evaluated.

RESULTS

For the given sample size, relapse tendencies showed statistically significant differences between cleft palate patients and non-cleft palate patients after maxillary advancement. The sella nasion angle and horizontal overlap of the maxillary and mandibular incisors (overjet) decreased by 2 degrees and 0.9 mm respectively in the cleft palate group while decreasing by 1.10 degrees and 0.40 mm in the non-cleft group.

CONCLUSIONS

After maxillary advancement with LeFort I osteotomy and miniplate fixation in patients with cleft palate and non-cleft patients, some degree of relapse was detected in both groups for the given sample size after one year post-operatively. The cleft palate group displayed additional relapse tendencies when compared to the non-cleft group.

Does the Rigid External Distraction Device Alter Maxillary Pitch in Cleft Maxillary Distraction?

The rigid external distraction (RED) device is reported to have the ability to three-dimensionally reposition the maxilla. The purpose of this study is to assess the ability of RED to intentionally alter the maxillary pitch.

Retrospective cohort study.

Institutional practice.

A retrospective chart review was completed over the past 12 years and a total of 50 patients met the inclusion criteria.

Cephalometric changes and alteration in palatal plane angle.

Cephalometric analysis of standardized landmarks was completed on calibrated, standardized lateral cephalograms. Pre-distraction and post-consolidation variables were compared via a two-tailed paired t-test.

The mean age at surgery of 12.2 ± 3.2 years. Through distraction osteogenesis (DO), the maxilla was moved anteriorly with a mean distraction distance of 8.4 ± 4.8 mm. The mean change in the angles sella-nasion-A-point angle (SNA), sella-nasion-B-point angle (SNB), and A-point-nasion-B-point angle (ANB) were 10.2 ± 4.8, 0.9 ± 2.7, and 9.3 ± 4.1, respectively. The mean change in the palatal plane angle was -4.4 ± 3.7. The mean change in the vertical position of the anterior nasal spine (ANS) and posterior nasal spine (PNS) in relation to the Frankfort horizontal (FH) were -2.0 ± 4.1 mm and 1.7 ± 3.8 mm, respectively.

This study documents short-term findings of RED in a large cleft lip and palate (CLP) population. Despite positioning of distraction eyelets superior to the theoretical center of resistance, a counterclockwise (CCW) rotation of the palatal plane occurred. This suggests that adjunctive methods of vector control should be considered if clockwise (CW) rotation of the palatal plane is intended with the RED device.

LeFort III/I for Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome: A Case Report

This case presents a facially mature patient with Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome (BWS) who presented with severe class III malocclusion. Computed tomography imaging revealed an anterior crossbite of 19 mm and a narrow pharyngeal airway at the level of the tongue base precluding mandibular setback surgery. The patient was indicated for a LeFort III combined with a LeFort I advancement, each of 10 mm, for a 20 mm combined advancement. Stable, functional occlusion was achieved without airway compromise. This novel use of the combined LeFort III/I can restore stable class I occlusion in patients with BWS at risk for tongue base airway compromise.

Long-term treatment outcome of patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with cleft lip and palate have functional and esthetic impairment and typically require multiple interventions in their life. Long-term evaluation following a treatment protocol, especially for patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), is important but was rarely reported in the literature.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on all patients with complete BCLP born between 1995 and 2002 and treated at our center. Inclusion criteria were having adequate medical records and receiving continuous multidisciplinary team care at least until 20 years of age. Exclusion criteria were lack of regular follow-up and congenital syndromic abnormalities. The medical records and photos were reviewed, and facial bone development was evaluated using cephalometric analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were included, with a mean age of 22.1 years at the final evaluation in this study. Primary one-stage cheiloplasty was performed in 91.0% of the patients, and 9.0% underwent two-stage repair with an initial adhesion cheiloplasty. All patients underwent two-flap palatoplasty at an average of 12.3 months. Surgical intervention for velopharyngeal insufficiency was required in 59.0% of patients. Revisional lip/nose surgery was performed in 31.1% during growing age and in 64.8% after skeletal maturity. Orthognathic surgery was applied in 60.7% of patients with retruded midface, of which 97.3% underwent two-jaw surgery. The average number of operations to complete the treatment was 5.9 per patient.

CONCLUSION

Patients with complete BCLP remain the most challenging group to treat among the cleft. This review revealed certain suboptimal results, and modifications have been made to the treatment protocol. Longitudinal follow-up and periodic assessment help to establish an ideal therapeutic strategy and improve overall cleft care.

One-Jaw versus Two-Jaw Orthognathic Surgery for Patients with Cleft: A Comparative Study Using 3D Imaging Virtual Surgical Planning

Whether a one-jaw or two-jaw design is used in orthognathic surgery for patients with cleft remains varied and controversial. This study aimed to compare the two approaches using 3-dimensional imaging surgical simulation. This study was conducted on 41 consecutive patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate treated in the craniofacial center. All patients had original two-jaw virtual planning and orthognathic surgery. Simulation of one-jaw LeFort I surgery was performed using the same final dental occlusion on 3-dimensional images. Cephalometric data and asymmetry index were collected and compared among the designs. Average advancement of the maxilla was 7.46 mm in one-jaw and 4.80 mm in two-jaw design. SNA, SNB, and A-N perpendicular were significantly greater and close to normative data in the one-jaw design. ANB angles were similar in both designs. The anterior and posterior occlusal plane cants, the deviation of midline landmarks, and the asymmetry index were more improved in the two-jaw approach. It is concluded that the two-jaw cleft orthognathic surgery could significantly improve facial midline and symmetry compared with the one-jaw approach. However, the two-jaw surgery with mandibular setback produced less protrusive facial contour although a harmonious relationship between the maxilla and mandible was achieved.