Search

The study evaluated the effects of three different primary treatment protocols on maxillary growth in patients aged 5 years with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). The secondary objective was to assess the influence of initial cleft severity, family history of class III, and status of permanent lateral incisor on maxillary growth. In total, 54 patients with non-syndromic complete UCLP were included and grouped as follows: group An underwent lip adhesion, cheilorhinoplasty associated with tibial periosteal graft for hard palate repair, and finally veloplasty; group B underwent lip adhesion, then cheilorhinoplasty with intravelar veloplasty, and finally a hard-palate repair; group C underwent cheilorhinoplasty with intravelar veloplasty and then a hard-palate repair. Five-year maxillary growth was assessed on dental models, both clinically and digitally. No difference was found with GOSLON-Yardstick scoring. Five-year measurements showed that group C tended to have the best maxillary arch morphology (p = 0.012). Initial cleft severity did not impact maxillary growth, but status of permanent lateral incisor and family history of class III did (p = 0.019 and p = 0.004, respectively). In patients aged 5 years, the two-stage approach appeared to be the least detrimental to growth development. Predictive factors for growth retardation included the absence of lateral incisor and a family history of class III., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The authors report the case of a 10-month-old child with total oral duplication. The authors review this pathology and the diagnostic and treatment modality through the few cases described in scientific history. The discussed etiopathogeny of this rare malformation is detailed in this work., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 by Mutaz B. Habal, MD.)

The primary aim of this study was to demonstrate whether primary rhinoplasty shows aesthetic and psychosocial advantages for children with a complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. The second aim was to determine the satisfaction levels concerning the dentofacial appearance. Group A corresponded to patients from a center specialised in primary cheilo-rhinoplasty with 20 years' experience and Group B to patients who did not benefit from primary rhinoplasty. Children and their parents filled in a custom-designed satisfaction questionnaire on dentofacial appearance and its psychosocial impact. The variables studied were the main criterion (the nose) and secondary criteria (the upper lip, the smile, the profile and the face as a whole). 56 families consented to be involved in the study. The children did not rate statistically differently their social relationships if they had primary rhinoplasty or not. Parents however expressed very different views. They considered the nasal appearance of the children who had primary rhinoplasty as statistically more attractive and evaluated their psychosocial experience as significantly better. For the other parts of the face, in both groups, satisfaction levels of dentofacial appearance and psychosocial comfort were good (scores above 80/100). Yet, 44% of the families would go for further interventions, especially concerning the nose (13% of whom were in Group A and 42% in Group B). Within the limitations of this study, primary rhinoplasty seems to improve the patient's well-being and social life and, therefore, should be considered whenever appropriate., (Copyright © 2021 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)