For Patients With Isolated Cleft Palate Does Revision Palatoplasty Have an Increased Risk of Inpatient Complication Compared to Primary Palatal Repair?
hard palate
palatoplasty
scarring; soft palate
Journal
The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association
ISSN: 1545-1569
Titre abrégé: Cleft Palate Craniofac J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9102566
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
18
8
2020
medline:
29
4
2021
entrez:
18
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study was to determine whether revision palatoplasty was associated with increased rates of inpatient complication and wound dehiscence compared to primary palatal repair. This was a retrospective study of patients with isolated cleft palate treated with primary palatoplasty or revision surgery for fistula repair. The records were obtained from the Kids' Inpatient Database between 2000 and 2014. The primary predictor was the type of surgery, classified as either primary or revision palatoplasty. Secondary predictors included demographics and comorbidities. Primary study outcomes were the postoperative complication and dehiscence rates as noted during the hospitalization course. The secondary outcomes related to health care utilization as measured through length of stay (LOS) and hospital charges. A total of 5357 total admissions (95.5% primary, 4.5% revision) were included in the final sample. Fistula repairs (odds ratio = 14.37, Although the rates of inpatient complications were not significantly different, revision palatoplasty was associated with a greater odds of wound dehiscence. Failure of a primary repair may portend an increased risk of wound failure with subsequent surgeries.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32799652
doi: 10.1177/1055665620949121
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM