Cleft Palate Repair: Predictive Factors of Difficulty and Planned Strategies to Solve It.
Journal
The Journal of craniofacial surgery
ISSN: 1536-3732
Titre abrégé: J Craniofac Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9010410
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Sep 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
23
6
2020
medline:
20
2
2021
entrez:
23
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A cleft of the primary and/or secondary palate involve almost every function of the face except vision. Today, an isolate cleft palate or a complete cleft lip/palate should not be considered as an adverse condition because surgical repair has reached a highly satisfactory level. Nevertheless, for the average cleft surgeon palatoplasty still remains an enigma. Having an observational and an anatomical measurement methodology of some pre op parameters, it would make possible to predict a complicate repair. In that way, the surgeon can select the best closure strategy, minimize surgical aggression, and even prevent the presence of sequels. Palates must be reviewed just before the operation, under general anesthesia, with the patient and the Dingman retractor in place. By using a precision caliper at least 4 parameters should to be considered to select the right strategy. Since 2009, author has selected the alveolar extension palatoplasty with complete muscle dissection and retro positioning, plus posterior pillars elongation with a hemi-uvula rotation and reconstruction as the procedure of choice for complete primary cleft palate repair. The utilization of the pre op mentioned parameters to identify cleft palate diversity and severity seems to be useful to select the correct strategy to perform cautious surgical procedures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32569044
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006606
pii: 00001665-202009000-00038
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1664-1667Références
Agrawal K. Cleft palate repair and variation. Indian J Plast Surg 2009; 42:102109.
Leow AM, Lo LJ. Palatoplasty: evolution and controversies. Chang Gung Med J 2008; 31:335345.
Moore MD, Lawrence WT, Ptak JJ, et al. Complications of primary palatoplasty: a twenty-one -years review. Cleft Palate J 1988; 25:156162.
Philadelphia, PA, Lindsay WK, Witzel MA. Bardach J, Morris HL. Cleft palate repair: Von Langenbeck technique. Multidisciplinary Management of Cleft Lip and Palate 1990; 303.
Dorrance GM, Bransfield JW. The pushback operation for repair of cleft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 1946; 1:145.
Braithwaite F, Maurice DG. The importance of the levator palatini muscle in cleft palate closure. Br J Plast Surg 1968; 21:6062.
Furlow LT Jr. Cleft palate repair by double opposing Z-plasty. Plast Reconstrc Surg 1986; 78:724738.
Schweckendiek W, Doz P. Primary veloplasty. Long term results without maxillary deformity-a 25 years report. Cleft Palate J 1978; 15:268274.
Talmant JC, Talmant JC. Cleft rhinoplasty, form primary to secondary surgery. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 2014; 59:555584.
Carstens MH. Sequential cleft management with the sliding sulcus technique and alveolar extension palatoplasty. J Craniofac Surg 1999; 10:503518.
Bennun RD, Genecov D. Unilateral Cleft lip and nose repair. Cleft Lip and Palate Management: a Comprehensive Atlas 2016; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell, 113-141.
Leclerc JE, Godbout A, Arteau-Gauthier I, et al. We can predict postpalatoplasty velopharyngeal insufficiency in cleft palate patients. Laryngoscope 2014; 124:561569.
Bennun RD, Monasterio Aljaro L. Cleft palate repair. Cleft Lip and Palate Management: A Comprehensive Atlas 2016; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell, 163–173.
Astrada S, Bennun RD. Cleft palate repair: a comparative research between two surgical procedures. J Craniofac Surg 2020;31:xx-xx