Speech Outcome and Velopharyngeal Function in Cleft Palate: Comparison of Le Fort I Maxillary Osteotomy and Distraction Osteogenesis—Early Results

Reshaping Faces, Redefining Risks: A Systematic Review of Orthognathic Surgery Outcomes in Cleft Lip and Palate Patients

Background: This study aims to determine a generalized outcome and risk profile for patients undergoing orthognathic surgery for the definitive treatment of cleft lip and palate. Furthermore, we hope to determine the key risk factors that cause increased risk for cleft lip and palate patients undergoing orthognathic surgery. Methods: This study includes a systematic review using PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Scopus. Data curation utilized Covidence software, with dual-reviewer screening and conflict resolution by a third party, focusing on publications with the full texts available. Results: The initial search yielded 1697 articles. Following title, abstract, and full-text screening, a total of 62 articles were included in this review. A total of 70.9% of included articles had moderate bias, with the rest having low risk of bias. The sample consisted of 2550 patients with an average age of about 20 years and an average follow-up of 16.8 months. The most employed procedure was Le Fort I osteotomy (99%). In terms of velopharyngeal function, there were notable increases in insufficiency and severity scores, with an average 63% worsening score from the baseline. That being said, patients experienced an average 33% improvement in speech articulation. Furthermore, the average horizontal movement was reported to be 6.09 mm with a subsequent relapse of 0.98 mm overall. Conclusions: This systematic review distills data from 62 articles and 2550 patients. It highlights the efficacy of orthognathic surgery in addressing oropharyngeal and aesthetic deficits. This study identifies relapse and velopharyngeal insufficiency as recurrent complications. These insights inform surgical refinement and patient counseling, laying a foundation for enhanced clinical protocols.

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.

Does Distraction Lower Risk of VPI Compared to Conventional Maxillary Advancement? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Adolescents with Cleft Palate

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether method of maxillary advancement in adolescents with cleft palate with or without cleft lip (CP ± L) influences post-operative velopharyngeal function.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Pediatric Tertiary Care Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and ninety-nine patients with CP ± L after LeFort I osteotomy for maxillary advancement at our institution between January 2007 and June 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

LeFort I osteotomy via distraction osteogenesis (DO) or conventional osteotomy (CO).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients who underwent DO or CO were compared for the presence of new velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), as measured by perceptual rating by a craniofacial speech-language pathologist.

Of the 199 patients who underwent maxillary advancement, 126 were available for analysis. The DO group was younger, male, and had more severe maxillary hypoplasia. Following surgery, 17/41 (41.5%) of the DO group had new VPI, compared to just 23/85 (27.1%) of the CO group. After adjusting for cleft type and predicted maxillary advancement, however, there was not sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no difference in risk of post-operative VPI between the two surgical groups (prevalence ratio [PR] 1.40, 95% CI 0.68-2.90). Increased prevalence of VPI after DO versus CO was primarily observed among patients with a pre-operative velopharyngeal need ratio < 0.8 (PR = 2.01, 95% CI 0.79-5.10) and patients with normal velopharyngeal function pre-operatively (PR = 2.86, 95% CI 0.96-8.50).

Our results suggest an increased rather than decreased risk of VPI following DO relative to CO. This association is primarily seen among those with a smaller velopharyngeal ratio or perceptually normal velopharyngeal function pre-operatively.

Long-term speech outcome after anterior distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla in patients with cleft lip and palate

Advancement of the maxilla may increase the distance between the soft palate and the posterior pharyngeal wall in patients with cleft lip and palate, implying a risk of velopharyngeal dysfunction. The aim was to evaluate long-term speech outcome in a consecutive series of patients treated with distraction osteogenesis (DO). Fourteen out of the 16 patients agreed to participate. A long-term speech follow-up was performed 1.5 to 13.5 years after DO. For two participants, audio recordings before DO were missing, and for another one, it was incomplete. The percentage of consonants correct (PCC) based on phonetic transcription and perceived velopharyngeal competence rated on a three-point scale were assessed before and after DO by three independent judges, based on audio recordings of reading of standardised sentences. Also, the participants were asked how they perceived their speech after DO. Changes in PCC were insignificant. Four participants perceived deteriorated speech related to DO. In two cases, the subjective deterioration did not correlate to results from perceptual assessment. In two others, the subjective deterioration correlated with the perceptual assessment, and the velopharyngeal function was judged as being incompetent after DO. After secondary velopharyngeal surgery, velopharyngeal function improved to competent in one case and marginally incompetent in the other. The results need to be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations but indicate that some patients develop deteriorated velopharyngeal function after DO. The impact on articulation needs to be further explored. It is important that patients are informed before treatment of the risk of velopharyngeal dysfunction after DO.

Cleft Lip and Palate Midfacial Hypoplasia: Criteria to Choose the Treatment

ABSTRACT

A series of skeletal and dentoalveolar/occlusal criteria were proposed for choosing the treatment modality for the management of midface hypoplasia in cleft lip/palate patients, focusing on functional improvement, aesthetics, and minimizing the risk of recurrence and secondary alterations. For which, 42 patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip/palate, all with previous primary lip/palate surgeries and without previous osteotomies, were analyzed. Orthognathic surgery (OS) (n = 24) and maxillary distraction osteogenesis (n = 18) with anterior segmental osteotomies (segmental distraction osteogenesis [SD]), alveolar transport disc (TD), and midface total distraction osteogenesis (TDO) by modified Le Fort III osteotomy was done.The average of maxillary advancement for OS was 5.58 ± 0.83 mm, for SD 9.4 ± 0.89 mm, for TD 8.00 ± 1.00 mm, and for TDO was 8.13 ± 1.55 mm.In the presence of infraorbital and/or zygomatic hypoplasia, TDO was performed using skeletal anchorage, with the requirement of occlusal stability in dental cast in occlusion. In short maxillary arch without dental cast feasibility in occlusion, hypodontia/agenesis or absence of premaxilla, TD and SD was performed. There was only 1 mm of recurrence in 1 patient of each group. Changes in speech were detected in 2 patients in the OS group (8.3%). Orthognathic surgery can be indicated for advancements ≤7 mm not requiring orbito-zygomatic advancement, whereas distraction osteogenesis can be indicated for advances >8 mm with or without the need for orbito-zygomatic advancement, in addition with other dentoalveolar factors and velopharyngeal function.

Identifying Predictors of Acquired Velopharyngeal Insufficiency in Cleft Lip and Palate Following Maxillary Osteotomy Using Multiple Regression Analyses

BACKGROUND

Maxillary osteotomy is typically undertaken to correct abnormal facial growth in cleft lip and palate. The surgery can cause velopharyngeal insufficiency resulting in hypernasality. This study aims to identify valid predictors of acquired velopharyngeal insufficiency following maxillary osteotomy by using a range of perceptual and instrumental speech investigations and multiple regression.

METHODS

A prospective study was undertaken consisting of a consecutive series of patients with cleft lip and palate (N = 20) undergoing maxillary osteotomy by a single surgeon. Participants were seen at: 0 to 3 months pre-surgery (T1), 3-months (T2), and 12-months (T3) post-surgery. Hypernasality was rated using the cleft audit protocol for speech-augmented (CAPS-A) and visual analog scales, and nasalance was measured on the Nasometer II 6400. For lateral videofluorosopic and nasendoscopic images, visual perceptual ratings and quantitative ratiometric measurements were undertaken. Multiple regression analyses were undertaken to identify predictors.

RESULTS

T3 models with hypernasality as the dependent variable were found to be a good fit and significant (eg, CAPS-A: R2 = 0.920, F(11,7) = 7.303, P = 0.007). Closure ratio (a quantitative ratiometric measurement) and proportion of palate contacting the posterior pharyngeal wall (a visual perceptual rating) were identified as significant predictors for the CAPS-A model (P = 0.030, P = 0.002).

Orthosurgical Management of a Patient with Cleft Lip and Palate

A 31-year-old male patient reported with a chief complaint of a forwardly placed lower jaw. Oral examination revealed Angle's Class III relationship bilaterally and cephalometrically; the patient presented with a small-sized retrognathic maxilla and normal mandible. Orthosurgical treatment was carried out with 4 mm of maxillary advancement and 4 mm of mandibular setback to achieve ideal overjet, overbite, and intercuspation of teeth. The ANB angle showed a drastic change from −9.5° to 1° and a successful conversion of the skeletal profile from Class III to Class I. Orthosurgical treatment can thus be an effective means of treating a patient with cleft lip and palate but requires a detailed understanding of the case and a sound diagnosis to attain a successful outcome.

Effect of maxillary advancement on speech and velopharyngeal function of patients with cleft palate: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review (SR) aimed to evaluate speech and velopharyngeal function (VPF) changes of patients with cleft palate (CLP) after maxillary advancement (MA) surgery. A two-phase PROSPERO-registered SR (CRD42019141370) was conducted following the PRISMA statements. Search strategies were developed for main databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, COCHRANE, LILACS, and EBSCOhost) and Grey literature information sources. The GRADE tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. From a total of 908 articles, 10 (205 men and 147 women; mean age ranging from 18.0 to 25.7 years) were selected for meta-analysis. Moderate to high risk of bias (Rob) was observed. The most common methods for outcomes evaluation were the Nasometer (speech) and nasoendoscopy (VPF). Speech changed from normal to hypernasal, and VPF worsening were reported in most studies. Comparing maxillary advancement interventions (osteogenic distraction versus Le Fort I), no statistically significant differences were found regarding benefit on speech and VPF. In summary, the effect of MA on speech and VPF remains controversial in CLP patients. The RoB, inconsistencies, and imprecisions severely affected the overall quality of evidence. Further adequately delineated clinical studies are necessary to investigate the potential effect of MA interventions on speech and VPF in CLP patients.

Challenges in the Successful Reconstruction of Cleft Lip and Palate: Managing the Nasomaxillary Deformity in Adolescence

The surgical techniques and execution of primary cleft lip and palate repair are no longer the greatest challenge to achieving successful rehabilitation for those born with facial clefting (i.e., bilateral and unilateral cleft lip and palate). Despite a surgeon's best efforts, when cleft palate repair is carried out during infancy, by the mixed dentition, a majority will demonstrate nasomaxillary deficiency. The cleft team's commitment to a family under their care is to ensure that the newborn reaches adulthood reconstructed without need for special regard to their original birth malformation. Guiding principles are provided for the accurate diagnosis and reliable reconstruction of the bilateral and unilateral cleft lip and palate adolescent/adult who presents with nasomaxillary deficiency and any residual oronasal fistula, bony defects, cleft dental gap(s), nasal obstructions, and associated facial dysmorphology. Successful orthognathic surgery provides a stable foundation on which any remaining soft-tissue cleft lip or cleft nasal deformities can be accurately assessed and then reconstructed.

Surgical maxillary advancement and speech resonance: comparison among cleft types

Purpose This study investigated the influence of the cleft type on the appearance of hypernasality after surgical maxillary advancement (MA). Methods Nasality was determined by measurement of nasalance (acoustic correlate of nasality) by nasometry. The study involved analysis of the nasalance scores of 17 individuals with isolated cleft palate (CP), 118 with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and 69 with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), of both sexes, aged 18 to 28 years, after MA. Only individuals with normal nasalance scores indicating balanced resonance before MA were included in this study. Nasometry was performed 3 days before and 15 months after MA, on average. The proportion of patients who presented nasalance scores indicating hypernasality after surgery was calculated by the ANOVA test, and comparison among the different cleft types was evaluated by the chi-square test (p < 0.05). Results No significant difference was found in the proportions of individuals with hypernasality among the cleft types. Conclusion Nasometry showed that the appearance of hypernasality after MA in individuals with cleft palate with or without cleft lip occurred in similar proportions, regardless of the cleft type.

Le Fort I osteotomy in cleft patients: Maxillary advancement and velopharyngeal function

BACKGROUND

Maxillary advancement may affect speech in cleft patients.

AIMS

To evaluate whether the amount of maxillary advancement in Le Fort I osteotomy affects velopharyngeal function (VPF) in cleft patients.

METHODS

Ninety-three non-syndromic cleft patients (51 females, 42 males) were evaluated retrospectively. All patients had undergone a Le Fort I or bimaxillary (n = 24) osteotomy at Helsinki Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Center. Preoperative and postoperative lateral cephalometric radiographs were digitized to measure the amount of maxillary advancement. Pre- and postoperative speech was assessed perceptually and instrumentally by experienced speech therapists. Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney's U-test were used in the statistical analyses. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess reliability.

RESULTS

The mean advancement of A point was 4.0 mm horizontally (range: -2.8-11.3) and 3.9 mm vertically (range -14.2-3.9). Although there was a negative change in VPF, the amount of maxillary horizontal or vertical movement did not significantly influence the VPF. There was no difference between the patients with maxillary and bimaxillary osteotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The amount of maxillary advancement does not affect the velopharyngeal function in cleft patients.

Predictors of Velopharyngeal Dysfunction in Individuals With Cleft Palate Following Surgical Maxillary Advancement: Clinical and Tomographic Assessments

Objective:

To investigate whether morphofunctional velopharyngeal aspects may be considered predictors of appearance or worsening of hypernasality in patients with cleft palate after surgical maxillary advancement (MA).

Design:

Prospective.

Setting:

National referral center for cleft lip and palate rehabilitation.

Participants:

Fifty-two patients with repaired cleft palate, skeletal class III malocclusion, and normal speech resonance completed speech audio recordings and cone-beam computed tomography examination before (T1) and, on average, 14 months after (T2) MA.

Interventions:

Hypernasality was rated by 3 experienced speech-language pathologists using a 4-point scale and morphofunctional aspects on a 3-point scale. Cone-beam computed tomography image measurements were performed using Amira and Dolphin 3D software. For each velopharyngeal morphofunctional aspect analyzed, patients were compared according to the absence (G1) and presence (G2) of postoperative hypernasality.

Main Outcome Measures:

Comparison of hypernasality scores between T1 and T2 and association between hypernasality and each velopharyngeal morphofunctional aspect.

Results:

Significant difference was observed between T1 and T2 for hypernasality ( P = .031) and between G1 and G2 ( P = .015) for velar mobility, with significant association between this variable and hypernasality on T2 ( P = .041).

Conclusions:

Levator veli palatini mobility influenced the appearance of hypernasality after MA.

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients

BACKGROUND

Cleft lip and palate is one of the most common birth defects and can cause difficulties with feeding, speech and hearing, as well as psychosocial problems. Treatment of orofacial clefts is prolonged; it typically commences after birth and lasts until the child reaches adulthood or even into adulthood. Residual deformities, functional disturbances, or both, are frequently seen in adults with a repaired cleft. Conventional orthognathic surgery, such as Le Fort I osteotomy, is often performed for the correction of maxillary hypoplasia. An alternative intervention is distraction osteogenesis, which achieves bone lengthening by gradual mechanical distraction. This review is an update of the original version that was published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To provide evidence regarding the effects and long-term results of maxillary distraction osteogenesis compared to orthognathic surgery for the treatment of hypoplastic maxilla in people with cleft lip and palate.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 15 May 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 15 May 2018), Embase Ovid (1980 to 15 May 2018), and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; from 1982 to 15 May 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing maxillary distraction osteogenesis to conventional Le Fort I osteotomy for the correction of cleft lip and palate maxillary hypoplasia in non-syndromic cleft patients aged 15 years or older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies for eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for clarification or missing information whenever possible. All standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane were used.

MAIN RESULTS

We found six publications involving a total of 47 participants requiring maxillary advancement of 4 mm to 10 mm. All of them related to a single trial performed between 2002 and 2008 at the University of Hong Kong, but not all of the publications reported outcomes from all 47 participants. The study compared maxillary distraction osteogenesis with orthognathic surgery, and included participants from 13 to 45 years of age.Results and conclusions should be interpreted with caution given the fact that this was a single trial at high risk of bias, with a small sample size.The main outcomes assessed were hard and soft tissue changes, skeletal relapse, effects on speech and velopharyngeal function, psychological status, and clinical morbidities.Both interventions produced notable hard and soft tissue improvements. Nevertheless, the distraction group demonstrated a greater maxillary advancement, evaluated as the advancement of Subspinale A-point: a mean difference of 4.40 mm (95% CI 0.24 to 8.56) was recorded two years postoperatively.Horizontal relapse of the maxilla was significantly less in the distraction osteogenesis group five years after surgery. A total forward movement of A-point of 2.27 mm was noted for the distraction group, whereas a backward movement of 2.53 mm was recorded for the osteotomy group (mean difference 4.8 mm, 95% CI 0.41 to 9.19).No statistically significant differences could be detected between the groups in speech outcomes, when evaluated through resonance (hypernasality) at 17 months postoperatively (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.85) and nasal emissions at 17 months postoperatively (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 66.53), or in velopharyngeal function at the same time point (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.52).Maxillary distraction initially lowered social self-esteem at least until the distractors were removed, at three months postoperatively, compared to the osteotomy group, but this improved over time and the distraction group had higher satisfaction with life in the long term (two years after surgery) (MD 2.95, 95% CI 014 to 5.76).Adverse effects, in terms of clinical morbidities, included mainly occlusal relapse and mucosal infection, with the frequency being similar between groups (3/15 participants in the distraction osteogenesis group and 3/14 participants in the osteotomy group). There was no severe harm to any participant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found only one small randomised controlled trial concerning the effectiveness of distraction osteogenesis compared to conventional orthognathic surgery. The available evidence is of very low quality, which indicates that further research is likely to change the estimate of the effect. Based on measured outcomes, distraction osteogenesis may produce more satisfactory results; however, further prospective research comprising assessment of a larger sample size with participants with different facial characteristics is required to confirm possible true differences between interventions.

A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in Cleft and Craniofacial Surgery

This study presents a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in cleft and craniofacial surgery. All studies reporting on RCTs in cleft and craniofacial surgery were identified on PubMed using the search terms "cleft," "velopharyngeal insufficiency," "velopharyngeal dysfunction," "nasoalveolar molding," "gingivoperiosteoplasty," "Pierre Robin sequence," "craniofacial," "craniosynostosis," "craniofacial microsomia," "hemifacial microsomia," "hypertelorism," "Le Fort," "monobloc," "distraction osteogenesis," "Treacher Collins," and "Goldenhar." Studies were excluded if they were not randomized, did not focus primarily on topics related to cleft or craniofacial surgery, included repeat publications of data, or were unavailable in English. Studies were evaluated on demographic and bibliometric data, study size, specific area of focus, and findings reported. Four hundred forty-seven unique studies were identified. One hundred eighty-three papers met inclusion criteria (115 cleft lip and palate, 65 craniofacial, and 3 spanning both disciplines). Sixty-six (36%) were dedicated to topics related to surgical techniques. There were no studies comparing current cleft lip or soft palate repair techniques and no studies on cleft rhinoplasty. The most frequently reported surgical topic was cleft palate. There were several studies on orthognathic techniques which compared distraction osteogenesis to traditional advancement. Most craniofacial operations, such as cranial vault remodeling and frontofacial advancement/distraction, were not represented. Several standard operations in cleft and craniofacial surgery are not supported by Level I evidence from randomized controlled trials. Our community should consider methods by which more RCTs can be performed, or redefine the acceptable standards of evidence to guide our clinical decisions.

A comprehensive management protocol to treat cleft maxillary hypoplasia

AIM

To describe a comprehensive management protocol to treat cleft maxillary hypoplasia specific to the patient's age, degree of hypoplasia and presence or absence of velopharyngeal incompetence (VPI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 359 patients suffering from cleft maxillary hypoplasia were retrospectively studied from January 2004 till June 2015. Lateral cephalograms were taken to assess the degree of deformity and advancement achieved at three intervals. Patients were treated by four treatment modalities: Facemask therapy, Anterior maxillary advancement, Total maxillary osteogenesis and LeFort I advancement.

RESULTS

359 patients of cleft maxillary hypoplasia were treated and followed up for a mean of 25 ± 3.6 months. Group I had 20 patients, all in the pre-pubertal age group with less than 11 mm discrepancy. 25% of patients in this group had relapse; Group II: 196 patients who were all above 11 years of age and included all grades of hypoplasia, only 6.25% patients had relapse; Group III had 36 patients all with severe form of hypoplasia and were above 5 years of age. Relapse in this group was 16.6%; Group IV had 102 patients who were above 16 years of age and had mildmoderate severity of hypoplasia. Relapse rate was 18.75%.

CONCLUSION

Extensive literature search and our institutional study has helped us formulate a protocol that delineates the most appropriate treatment modality for a specific age group and degree of hypoplasia also considering the effect of treatment on velopharyngeal incompetence.

Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials in Cleft Lip and Palate: A 10-Year Review

Objectives

Reviews of the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently been conducted in different surgical specialties. In this review of RCTs relating to cleft lip, cleft palate, and cleft lip and palate (CL/P), we investigate the quality of reporting against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist.

Design

A systematic review of CL/P RCTs published from 2004 to 2013, with the included articles scored against the CONSORT checklist.

Patients, Participants

The literature search identified 174 articles. Studies were selected for participants with CL/P who were involved in an RCT with prospective data collection and reported in a full journal article. A total of 6352 participants were included from 65 CUP RCTs during the study period.

Main Outcome Measures

The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed using the CONSORT checklist and Jadad scale.

Results

The mean CONSORT score was 15.8, and the mean Jadad score was 3.3. There was a significant positive correlation between the CONSORT and Jadad score ( P < .0001, ρ = .47). The only significant correlation showed that with an increasing number of authors, both the CONSORT and the Jadad score increased.

Conclusion

This analysis has shown that that there are deficiencies in the transparent reporting of factors such as randomization implementation, blinding, and participant flow. Interventions, outcomes, and the interpretation of results are well presented. We would recommend that RCTs are conceived and undertaken using the CONSORT checklist and reported in a clear and reproducible manner.

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients

BACKGROUND

Cleft lip and palate is one of the most common birth defects and can cause difficulties with feeding, speech and hearing, as well as psychosocial problems. Treatment of orofacial clefts is prolonged; it typically commences after birth and lasts until the child reaches adulthood or even into adulthood. Residual deformities, functional disturbances, or both, are frequently seen in adults with a repaired cleft. Conventional orthognathic surgery, such as Le Fort I osteotomy, is often performed for the correction of maxillary hypoplasia. An alternative intervention is distraction osteogenesis, which achieves bone lengthening by gradual mechanical distraction.

OBJECTIVES

To provide evidence regarding the effects and long-term results of maxillary distraction osteogenesis compared to orthognathic surgery for the treatment of hypoplastic maxilla in people with cleft lip and palate.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 16 February 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 16 February 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 16 February 2016), LILACS BIREME (1982 to 16 February 2016), the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) (to 16 February 2016), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 16 February 2016). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication in the electronic searches. We performed handsearching of six speciality journals and we checked the reference lists of all trials identified for further studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing maxillary distraction osteogenesis to conventional Le Fort I osteotomy for the correction of cleft lip and palate maxillary hypoplasia in non-syndromic cleft patients aged 15 years or older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies for eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for clarification or missing information whenever possible. All standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane were used.

MAIN RESULTS

We found six publications involving a total of 47 participants requiring maxillary advancement of 4 mm to 10 mm. All of them related to a single trial performed between 2002 and 2008 at the University of Hong Kong, but not all of the publications reported outcomes from all 47 participants. The study compared maxillary distraction osteogenesis with orthognathic surgery, and included participants from 13 to 45 years of age.Results and conclusions should be interpreted with caution given the fact that this was a single trial at high risk of bias, with a small sample size.The main outcomes assessed were hard and soft tissue changes, skeletal relapse, effects on speech and velopharyngeal function, psychological status, and clinical morbidities.Both interventions produced notable hard and soft tissue improvements. Nevertheless, the distraction group demonstrated a greater maxillary advancement, evaluated as the advancement of Subspinale A-point: a mean difference of 4.40 mm (95% CI 0.24 to 8.56) was recorded two years postoperatively.Horizontal relapse of the maxilla was significantly less in the distraction osteogenesis group five years after surgery. A total forward movement of A-point of 2.27 mm was noted for the distraction group, whereas a backward movement of 2.53 mm was recorded for the osteotomy group (mean difference 4.8 mm, 95% CI 0.41 to 9.19).No statistically significant differences could be detected between the groups in speech outcomes, when evaluated through resonance (hypernasality) at 17 months postoperatively (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.85) and nasal emissions at 17 months postoperatively (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 66.53), or in velopharyngeal function at the same time point (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.52).Maxillary distraction initially lowered social self-esteem at least until the distractors were removed, at three months postoperatively, compared to the osteotomy group, but this improved over time and the distraction group had higher satisfaction with life in the long term (two years after surgery) (MD 2.95, 95% CI 014 to 5.76).Adverse effects, in terms of clinical morbidities, included mainly occlusal relapse and mucosal infection, with the frequency being similar between groups (3/15 participants in the distraction osteogenesis group and 3/14 participants in the osteotomy group). There was no severe harm to any participant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found only one small randomised controlled trial concerning the effectiveness of distraction osteogenesis compared to conventional orthognathic surgery. The available evidence is of very low quality, which indicates that further research is likely to change the estimate of the effect. Based on measured outcomes, distraction osteogenesis may produce more satisfactory results; however, further prospective research comprising assessment of a larger sample size with participants with different facial characteristics is required to confirm possible true differences between interventions.

Voice onset time of alveolar stop /t/ and realization of unaspirated affricates associated with Mandarin-speaking children with repaired cleft palate

PURPOSE

To examine perceptually the realization of unaspirated affricates and voice onset time (VOT) features of /t/ in Mandarin-speaking children with repaired cleft palate, and to explore the difficulties associated with unaspirated affricate production from the perspective of the VOT of /t/.

METHOD

Twenty-three children with repaired cleft palate and 22 age-matched typical native Mandarin speakers were recruited. Speakers with cleft palate were allocated into two groups based on expert perceptual judgment of nasality: one group with perceived normal resonance (PNR) (n = 14, average age = 9.3 years), and another group with perceived hypernasal resonance (PHR) (n = 9, average age = 10.3 years).

INTERVENTION

Stimuli were collected through a series of picture naming tasks, targeting the production of initial consonants /t/ and three unaspirated Mandarin affricates /ts, tʂ, tɕ/. The productions of each affricate were evaluated by two experienced speech therapists. The VOT of /t/ was measured using PRAAT speech analysis software.

RESULT

The majority of unaspirated affricates were omitted and/or weakly realized by the group of PHR speakers, but not for the PNR group. A significantly smaller mean VOT value associated with /t/ was identified for the PHR group, as compared to the PNR group. A group difference for VOT value was not found between the PNR group and the typical control group.

CONCLUSION

The voicing features of /t/ and omitted/weak realization of unaspirated affricates identified in the PHR group indicated that the deviant production of unaspirated affricates in the cleft palate group could be associated with the voicing characteristics of the alveolar stop /t/, and this merits further investigation.

Le fort I maxillary advancement using distraction osteogenesis

Treatment of maxillary hypoplasia has traditionally involved conventional Le Fort I osteotomies and advancement. Advancements of greater than 10 mm risk significant relapse. This risk is greater in the cleft lip and palate population, whose anatomy and soft tissue scarring from prior procedures contributes to instability of conventional maxillary advancement. Le Fort I advancement with distraction osteogenesis has emerged as viable, stable treatment modality correction of severe maxillary hypoplasia in cleft, syndromic, and noncleft patients. In this article, the authors provide a review of current data and recommendations concerning Le Fort I advancement with distraction osteogenesis. In addition, they outline their technique for treating severe maxillary hypoplasia with distraction osteogenesis using internal devices.

Velopharyngeal dysfunction: a systematic review of major instrumental and auditory-perceptual assessments

Introduction: Velopharyngeal dysfunction may cause impaired verbal communication skills in individuals with cleft lip and palate; thus, patients with this disorder need to undergo both instrumental and auditory-perceptual assessments.

Objective: To investigate the main methods used to evaluate velopharyngeal function in individuals with cleft lip and palate and to determine whether there is an association between videonasoendoscopy results and auditory-perceptual assessments.

Method: We conducted a systematic review of the literature on instrumental and auditory-perceptual assessments. We searched the PubMed, Medline, Lilacs, Cochrane, and SciELO databases from October to November 2012.

Summary of findings: We found 1,300 studies about the topic of interest published between 1990 and 2012. Of these, 56 studies focused on velopharyngeal physiology; 29 studies presented data on velopharyngeal physiology using at least 1 instrumental assessment and/or 1 auditory-perceptual assessment, and 12 studies associated the results of both types of assessments. Only 3 studies described in detail the analysis of both methods of evaluating velopharyngeal function; however, associations between these findings were not analyzed.

Conclusion: We found few studies clearly addressing the criteria chosen to investigate velopharyngeal dysfunction and associations between videonasoendoscopy results and auditory-perceptual assessments.

Protocols in cleft lip and palate treatment: systematic review

Objectives. To find clinical decisions on cleft treatment based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Method. Searches were made in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library on cleft lip and/or palate. From the 170 articles found in the searches, 28 were considered adequate to guide clinical practice. Results. A scarce number of RCTs were found approaching cleft treatment. The experimental clinical approaches analyzed in the 28 articles were infant orthopedics, rectal acetaminophen, palatal block with bupivacaine, infraorbital nerve block with bupivacaine, osteogenesis distraction, intravenous dexamethasone sodium phosphate, and alveoloplasty with bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2). Conclusions. Few randomized controlled trials were found approaching cleft treatment, and fewer related to surgical repair of this deformity. So there is a need for more multicenter collaborations, mainly on surgical area, to reduce the variety of treatment modalities and to ensure that the cleft patient receives an evidence-based clinical practice.

Perceptual speech assessment after maxillary advancement osteotomy in patients with a repaired cleft lip and palate

Background

Maxillary hypoplasia refers to a deficiency in the growth of the maxilla commonly seen in patients with a repaired cleft palate. Those who develop maxillary hypoplasia can be offered a repositioning of the maxilla to a functional and esthetic position. Velopharyngeal dysfunction is one of the important problems affecting speech after maxillary advancement surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of maxillary advancement on repaired cleft palate patients without preoperative deterioration in speech compared with non-cleft palate patients.

Methods

Eighteen patients underwent Le Fort I osteotomy between 2005 and 2011. One patient was excluded due to preoperative deterioration in speech. Eight repaired cleft palate patients belonged to group A, and 9 non-cleft palate patients belonged to group B. Speech assessments were performed preoperatively and postoperatively by using a speech screening protocol that consisted of a list of single words designed by Ok-Ran Jung. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine if there were significant differences between the preoperative and postoperative outcomes in each group A and B. And Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine if there were significant differences in the change of score between groups A and B.

Results

No patients had any noticeable change in speech production on perceptual assessment after maxillary advancement in our study. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between groups A and B.

Conclusions

Repaired cleft palate patients without preoperative velopharyngeal dysfunction would not have greater risk of deterioration of velopharyngeal function after maxillary advancement compared to non-cleft palate patients.

Comparative study of different osteotomy modalities in maxillary distraction osteogenesis for cleft lip and palate

PURPOSE

Conventional maxillary distraction osteogenesis and anterior maxillary segmental distraction were applied in the treatment of severe maxillary hypoplasia secondary to cleft clip and palate. The aim of the present study was to compare the difference between these 2 osteotomy modalities used for rigid external distraction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten patients with severe maxillary hypoplasia secondary to CLP were enrolled in our study. They were randomly divided into 2 groups. Conventional maxillary distraction osteogenesis was performed in 5 patients and anterior maxillary segmental distraction in 5 patients. The preoperative and postoperative lateral cephalograms were compared, and cephalometric analysis was performed. The independent sample t test was used to evaluate the differences between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

All patients healed uneventfully, and the maxillae moved forward satisfactorily. The sella-nasion-point A angles, nasion-point A-Frankfort horizontal plane angles, overjets, and 0-meridian to subnasale distances had increased significantly after distraction osteogenesis. Significant differences were found in the changes in palatal length between the 2 groups (P < .05). A mean increase of 7.50 mm in palatal length was found in the anterior maxillary segmental distraction group. No significant difference in the changes in palatopharyngeal depth or soft palatal length was found.

CONCLUSIONS

With the ability of increasing the palatal and arch length, avoiding changes in palatopharyngeal depth, and preserving palatopharyngeal closure function, anterior maxillary segmental distraction has great value in the treatment of maxillary hypoplasia secondary to CLP. It is a promising and valuable technique in this potentially complicated procedure.

Maxillary distraction versus orthognathic surgery in cleft lip and palate patients: effects on speech and velopharyngeal function

This clinical randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the effects of distraction osteogenesis (DO) and conventional orthognathic surgery (CO) on velopharyngeal function and speech outcomes in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients. Twenty-one CLP patients who required maxillary advancement ranging from 4 to 10 mm were recruited and randomly assigned to either CO or DO. Evaluation of resonance and nasal emission, nasoendoscopic velopharyngeal assessment and nasometry were performed preoperatively and at a minimum of two postoperative times: 3-8 months (mean 4 months) and 12-29 months (mean 17 months). Results showed no significant differences in speech and velopharyngeal function changes between the two groups. No correlation was found between the amount of advancement and the outcome measures. It was concluded that DO has no advantage over CO for the purpose of preventing velopharyngeal incompetence and speech disturbance in moderate cleft maxillary advancement.

Anterior maxillary segmental distraction for correction of maxillary hypoplasia and dental crowding in cleft palate patients: a preliminary report

To evaluate the feasibility of anterior maxillary segmental distraction (AMSD) to correct maxillary hypoplasia and severe dental crowding in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients, 7 patients (average age 16.4 years) with maxillary hypoplasia, shortened maxillary dental arch length and severe anterior dental crowding secondary to CLP were selected for this study. After anterior maxillary segmental osteotomy, 3 patients were treated using bilateral internal distraction devices, and 4 patients were treated using rigid external distraction devices. Photographs and radiographs were taken to review the improvement in facial profile and occlusion after distraction. An average 10.25 mm anterior maxillary advancement was obtained in all patients after 10-23 days of distraction and 9-16 weeks of consolidation. The sella-nasion-point A (SNA) angle increased from 69.5 degrees to 79.6 degrees. Midface convexity was greatly improved and velopharyngeal competence was preserved. The maxillary dental arch length was greatly increased by 10.1 mm (P<0.01). Dental crowding and malocclusion were corrected by orthodontic treatment. These results show that AMSD can effectively correct the hypoplastic maxilla and severe dental crowding associated with CLP by increasing the midface convexity and dental arch length while preserving velopharyngeal function, and dental crowding can be corrected without requiring tooth extraction.

Current practice of distraction osteogenesis for craniofacial anomalies in Europe: a web based survey

Aim of the study was to get more insight into the opinion of European surgeons and orthodontists on the use of distraction osteogenesis (DO) for patients with different diagnoses and treatment protocols. A web based survey was set up, showing records of four patients with different conditions: hemifacial microsomia (case 1), bilateral mandibular deficiency (case 2), cleft lip and palate (case 3) and Crouzon syndrome (case 4). Respondents from 181 Eurocleft centres were asked to fill out a questionnaire for each patient. Most of the respondents considered case 1 (80%), case 3 (81%) and case 4 (86%) suitable for DO, while only 31% were considering case 2 for DO. There was lack of consensus among the respondents about many aspects of DO. Out of six different treatment parameters, an acceptable degree of agreement was only seen in two: a latency period of 3-7 days and a distraction rate of 1mm per day. Furthermore, there was noticeable disagreement on the ideal age for treatment, surgical technique, distraction device, and retention period. Our results showed that there is a wide variety in treatment approaches for craniofacial anomalies in Europe. There is disagreement on essential steps in the distraction procedures.