Revision Palatoplasty Research Articles

Managing massive palatial defect secondary to palatoplasty failures: an in-depth analysis.

Massive palatal defects resulting from palatoplasty failures arising from cleft palate repair complications present ongoing challenges in clinical practice. The purpose of this review is to provide up-to-date insights into aetiology, risk factors, surgical techniques, and adjunctive therapies, aiming to enhance the understanding of such complex cases, and optimize patient outcomes. Primary palatoplasty has fistula recurrence rates ranging from 2.4% to 55%. Factors such as cleft width, surgical repair method, and patient characteristics, influence the likelihood of failure. Classifications such as the Pakistan Comprehensive Classification and Richardson's criteria aid in assessing defects. Surgical options range from local flaps and revision palatoplasty to regional flaps (e.g., buccinator myomucosal, facial artery-based flaps, tongue flaps, nasal septal flaps) to free microvascular flaps. Alternative approaches include obturator prostheses, and acellular dermal matrix has been used as an adjuvant to multiple repair techniques. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy has emerged as an adjunctive therapy to enhance tissue healing. This comprehensive review underscores the intricate challenges associated with massive palatal defects resulting from palatoplasty failures. The diverse range of surgical and nonsurgical options emphasizes the importance of patient-centric, individualized approaches. Practitioners, armed with evidence-based insights, can navigate these complexities, offering tailored interventions for improved patient outcomes.

Bilateral Buccal Flap Revision Palatoplasty to Correct Velopharyngeal Dysfunction: Perceptual Speech, Acoustic, and Aerodynamic Outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to analyze perceptual, acoustic, and aerodynamic changes in speech and velopharyngeal function after bilateral buccal flap revision palatoplasty (BBFRP) in patients with repaired cleft palate. Ten consecutive patients ages 4 to 18 years with velopharyngeal dysfunction treated with BBFRP by a single surgeon were evaluated. Using a visual analog scale, nine blinded speech-language pathologists independently rated hypernasality, hyponasality, audible nasal emission, and speech acceptability. Measurements of the acoustic speech signal were used to quantify changes in hypernasality and nasal emission. The pressure flow technique was used to determine changes in velopharyngeal gap size. Complete records were available for eight patients. After surgery, hypernasality decreased ( P < 0.001) and speech acceptability increased ( P < 0.001) significantly. Audible nasal emission was significantly reduced ( P < 0.001). Postoperative acoustic measures showed a reduction of nasal emission and nasalization. Velopharyngeal gap size significantly decreased after BBFRP ( P < 0.001), correlating with lower visual analog scale ratings of hypernasality ( P = 0.015). Hyponasality did not change significantly after surgery ( P = 0.964). No patient developed sleep-disordered breathing. BBFRP resulted in a measurable improvement in hypernasal speech, audible nasal emission, and speech acceptability without significant changes in hyponasality or risk of obstructive sleep apnea. Therapeutic, IV.

Versatality of Buccinator Myomusosal Flap for VPI Correction: A Center Based Experience

Objectives: Wide range of surgical approaches, both conservative and surgical techniques for the correction of VPI have been described in the literature. Broadly classified into revision palatoplasty and pharyngoplasty, the surgical methodology changes as per needs. Buccinator myomucosal flap is one such flap that is chiefly used in cases that qualify for correction of VPI by palatal lengthening. By this case series and review, we present the treatment algorithm followed in our centre in deciding the suited treatment modality for the best patient outcomes. Materials and Methods: This article includes retrospective analysis of 12 patients who underwent palatal augmentation in our hospital All the cases presented with VPI after primary palatoplasty. Based on specific patient selection criteria, the selected patients were operated for surgical lengthening of the soft palate using bilateral BMMF. The patient was then assessed and compared to the pre-operative state for betterment. Results: All the twelve patients who underwent VPI surgical correction with the bilateral Buccinator‑based myomucosal flap reported improvement in standard of living and were satisfied with the results. Conclusion: Successful treatment outcomes validate the use of BMMF for of VPI are reliable, reproducible, and leads to great outcomes in the management of VPI.

Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study of Revision Palatoplasty Versus Pharyngoplasty for Treatment of Velopharyngeal Insufficiency Following Cleft Palate Repair.

To present the design and methodology for an actively enrolling comparative effectiveness study of revision palatoplasty versus pharyngoplasty for the treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI). Prospective observational multicenter study. Twelve hospitals across the United States and Canada. Individuals who are 3-23 years of age with a history of repaired cleft palate and a diagnosis of VPI, with a total enrollment target of 528 participants. Revision palatoplasty and pharyngoplasty (either pharyngeal flap or sphincter pharyngoplasty), as selected for each participant by their treatment team. The primary outcome is resolution of hypernasality, defined as the absence of consistent hypernasality as determined by blinded perceptual assessment of a standard speech sample recorded twelve months after surgery. The secondary outcome is incidence of new onset obstructive sleep apnea. Statistical analyses will use propensity score matching to control for demographics, medical history, preoperative severity of hypernasality, and preoperative imaging findings. Study recruitment began February 2021. As of September 2022, 148 participants are enrolled, and 78 have undergone VPI surgery. Enrollment is projected to continue into 2025. Collection of postoperative evaluations should be completed by the end of 2026, with dissemination of results soon thereafter. Patients with VPI following cleft palate repair are being actively enrolled at sites across the US and Canada into a prospective observational study evaluating surgical outcomes. This study will be the largest and most comprehensive study of VPI surgery outcomes to date.

Tissue Augmenting Palatoplasty for the Treatment of Velopharyngeal Insufficiency

Persistent velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) following primary palatoplasty remains a difficult problem to treat. This study evaluates speech outcomes following revision palatoplasty with tissue augmentation using buccal myomucosal flaps (BMF) as an alternative to pharyngoplasty for patients with VPI. A retrospective single-center review of revision palatoplasty with tissue augmentation at a tertiary pediatric hospital Cleft-Craniofacial Center between January 2017 and March 2021 was conducted. Patients with a history of previous palatoplasty, a diagnosis of persistent or recurrent VPI, and comprehensive pre- and postoperative speech evaluations who underwent revision palatoplasty with BMF were included. Twenty patients met inclusion criteria (35% female, 20% syndromic). Mean age at the time of revision palatoplasty with BMF was 9.7 years. Preoperatively, all patients had stigmatizing speech and received the recommendation for speech surgery; the mean Pittsburgh Weighted Speech Score (PWSS) was 14.3 ± 4.9. The mean postoperative PWSS at the most recent assessment was 4.2 ± 2.3, representing a statistically significant improvement from preoperative scores (P < .001). Mean follow-up time was 8.9 months. Following revision palatoplasty with BMF, only one patient has received the recommendation for further speech surgery. No complications were noted. In patients with VPI following primary palatoplasty, revision palatoplasty with tissue augmentation offers an alternative to pharyngoplasty. This approach preserves dynamic velopharyngeal function, improves speech outcomes, and should be considered an option when treating patients with post-primary palatoplasty VPI.

The limits of pandemic precautions: Tympanostomy tube placement in children with cleft palate during COVID-19

PurposeCoronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) mitigation measures have led to a sustained reduction in tympanostomy tube (TT) placement in the general population. The present aim was to determine if TT placement has also decreased in children at risk for chronic otitis media with effusion (COME), such as those with cleft palate (CP). Materials and methodsA cohort study with medical record review was performed including consecutive children, ages 0–17 years, undergoing primary palatoplasty at a tertiary children's hospital February 2019–January 2020 (pre-COVID) or May 2020–April 2021 (COVID). Revision palatoplasty (n = 29) was excluded. Patient characteristics and middle ear status pre-operatively and at palatoplasty were compared between groups using logistic regression or Wilcoxon rank-sum. ResultsThe pre-COVID and COVID cohorts included 73 and 87 patients, respectively. Seventy (44%) were female and median age at palatoplasty was 13.5 months for CP ± cleft lip (CP ± L) and 5.5 years for submucous cleft palate (SMCP). In patients with CP ± L, TT were placed or in place and patent at palatoplasty in 28/38 (74%) pre-COVID and 37/50 (74%) during COVID (P = 0.97). In patients with SMCP, these proportions were 5/35 (14%) and 6/37 (16%), respectively (P = 0.82). Examining only patients <2 years of age also revealed no difference in TT placement pre-COVID versus COVID (P = 0.99). Finally, the prevalence and type of effusion during COVID was similar to pre-COVID. ConclusionsReduced infectious exposure has not decreased TT placement or effusion at palatoplasty. Future work could focus on non-infectious immunologic factors underlying the maintenance of COME in these children.

Bilateral Buccal Flap Revision Palatoplasty to Correct VPD: Perceptual Speech, Acoustic, and Aerodynamic Outcomes

Bilateral Buccal Flap Revision Palatoplasty to Correct VPD: Perceptual Speech, Acoustic, and Aerodynamic Outcomes

Predictive Factors for Velopharyngeal Insufficiency Following Primary Cleft Palate Repair.

Velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) remains a known complication of primary palatoplasty. We sought to identify factors associated with the incidence of VPI and create a predictive model for VPI development in our population. A single-institution, retrospective review. Multidisciplinary clinic in a tertiary academic institution. A total of 453 consecutive patients undergoing primary palatoplasty from 1999 to 2016 were reviewed. Inclusion required follow-up past age 5. Patients who were non-verbal, and thus unable to undergo speech evaluation, were excluded. Primary outcome was VPI, defined as revision palatoplasty or recommendation by speech-language pathology. Of 318 patients included, 179 (56%) were male. Median age at primary repair was 1.0 years (0.9-1.1) with a median age of 8.8 years at last follow-up. One hundred nineteen (37%) patients developed VPI at a median age of 5.0 years (3.8-6.5). Higher rates were seen with posterior fistula (65% vs 14%, P <.01) and straight-line repair (41% vs 9%, P <.01), with lower rates in patients with Veau I clefts (22% vs 39%, P <.05). Patients with VPI were older at last follow-up. Following multivariate regression, factors remaining significant were posterior fistula (odds ratio [OR]: 11.3, 95% CI: 6.1-22.0), primary Furlow repair (OR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.03-0.68), genetic diagnoses (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.1-7.9), and age at last follow-up (OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.01-1.2). Length of follow-up, posterior fistulae, and genetic diagnoses are associated with VPI formation. Furlow repair may protect against formation of VPI. Use of allograft, Veau class, birth type, birth weight, and race are not independently associated with VPI formation.

Complications and the Need for Long-Term Follow-Up after Secondary Speech Surgery: A National and Longitudinal Claims Analysis.

Although most patients attain normal speech after cleft palate repair, up to 20 percent require secondary speech surgery. Despite the frequency of these procedures, complications and rates of subsequent revisions of secondary speech surgery after all procedure types have never been reviewed using national, longitudinal data. The authors examined insurance claims from Clinformatics Data Mart between 2001 and 2017. Cases were categorized as palatalprocedures (i.e., palatoplasty, revision palatoplasty, secondary lengthening, palatal island flap) or pharyngeal procedures (i.e., pharyngeal flap, dynamic sphincter pharyngoplasty) (n = 846). Continuous enrollment from 180 days before to 30 days after surgery was required. Patients were excluded if they underwent palatoplasty, or any surgery at less than 3 years of age, without a speech diagnosis. Outcomes included 30-day complications and rates of subsequent revision secondary speech surgery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between procedure type and complications. In this cohort, 52.5 percent underwent pharyngeal procedures, and 47.5 percent underwent palatal procedures. Complications occurred in 10.9 percent of patients and included respiratory complications (4.0 percent), bleeding (1.2 percent), dehiscence (3.6 percent), and critical care episodes (3.0 percent). There was no difference in complications between procedure types (OR, 0.87; 95 percent CI, 0.56 to 1.37; p = 0.56). The subsequent revision rate was 12.7 percent, but was 21.7 percent in patients with 3 years of postoperative enrollment. Although complication rates were comparable to those in recent literature, rates of subsequent revisions of secondary speech procedures were high in patients with longer postoperative enrollment. Thus, these patients merit prolonged follow-up, as velopharyngeal dysfunction may recur over time. Therapeutic, III.

For Patients With Isolated Cleft Palate Does Revision Palatoplasty Have an Increased Risk of Inpatient Complication Compared to Primary Palatal Repair?

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, P < .01) had significantly greater odds of wound dehiscence. The rates of inpatient complication ranged from 3.5% to 3.7%, and there were no significant differences between primary and revision surgery (P = .82). Complications were independently associated with insurance status and congenital anomalies. Complications and wound dehiscence both significantly increased the LOS and the hospital charges. Fistula repairs had a shorter mean LOS (P = .02), however this did not translate into cost savings (P = .60). 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.

Treating Velopharyngeal Inadequacy Using Bilateral Buccal Flap Revision Palatoplasty

Purpose The 2 most commonly used operations to treat velopharyngeal inadequacy (VPI) are superiorly based pharyngeal flap and sphincter pharyngoplasty, both of which may result in hyponasal speech and airway obstruction. The purpose of this article is to (a) describe the bilateral buccal flap revision palatoplasty (BBFRP) as an alternative technique to manage VPI while minimizing these risks and (b) conduct a systematic review of the evidence of BBFRP on speech and other clinical outcomes. A report comparing the speech of a child with hypernasality before and after BBFRP is presented. Method A review of databases was conducted for studies of buccal flaps to treat VPI. Using the principles of a systematic review, the articles were read, and data were abstracted for study characteristics that were developed a priori. With respect to the case report, speech and instrumental data from a child with repaired cleft lip and palate and hypernasal speech were collected and analyzed before and after surgery. Results Eight articles were included in the analysis. The results were positive, and the evidence is in favor of BBFRP in improving velopharyngeal function, while minimizing the risk of hyponasal speech and obstructive sleep apnea. Before surgery, the child's speech was characterized by moderate hypernasality, and after surgery, it was judged to be within normal limits. Conclusion Based on clinical experience and results from the systematic review, there is sufficient evidence that the buccal flap is effective in improving resonance and minimizing obstructive sleep apnea. We recommend BBFRP as another approach in selected patients to manage VPI. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.9919352

Management of Speech and Swallowing Disorders in Children with Oral Clefts

Cleft lip and palate are common congenital anomalies with significant implications for feeding, swallowing, and speech. If a cleft palate goes unrepaired, a child will have difficulty distinguishing nasal and oral sounds. Even following cleft palate repair, approximately 20 to 30% of nonsyndromic children have persistent hypernasal speech. This often occurs due to velopharyngeal dysfunction (VPD), a term describing failure of the soft palate and pharyngeal walls to seal the nasopharynx from the oropharynx during oral consonant production. The gold standard for diagnosis is perceptual examination by a trained speech pathologist, although additional diagnostic tools such as nasendoscopy are often used. Treatment options for VPD range from speech therapy to revision palatoplasty, sphincter pharyngoplasty, pharyngeal flap, and pharyngeal wall augmentation. Palatal prosthetics may also be considered for children who are not surgical candidates. Further research is needed to improve selection of diagnostic and treatment interventions and optimize speech outcomes for children with a history of oral cleft. This review contains 1 figure, 3 videos, and 58 references. Key words: Cleft lip and palate, hypernasal resonance, levator veli palatine, nasal emission, nasendoscopy, palatoplasty, pharyngeal flap, posterior pharyngeal wall augmentation, sphincter pharyngoplasty, velopharyngeal dysfunction

Revision Palatoplasty for Velopharyngeal Dysfunction Using Bilateral Buccal Myomucosal Flaps: An Assessment of Speech Outcomes

Revision Palatoplasty for Velopharyngeal Dysfunction Using Bilateral Buccal Myomucosal Flaps: An Assessment of Speech Outcomes