Timing Of Hard Palate Closure Research Articles

Do Infant Cleft Dimensions Have an Influence on Occlusal Relations? A Subgroup Analysis Within an RCT of Primary Surgery in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate.

To investigate whether infant cleft dimensions, in a surgical protocol with early or delayed hard palate closure, influence occlusion before orthodontics. Subgroup analysis within a randomized trial of primary surgery (Scandcleft). Tertiary health care. One surgical centre. A total of 122 unilateral cleft lip and palate infants received primary cheilo-rhinoplasty and soft palate closure at age 4 months and were randomized for hard palate closure at age 12 versus 36 months. A novel 3D analysis of cleft size and morphology was performed on digitized presurgical models. Occlusion was scored on 8-year models using the modified Huddarth-Bodenham (MHB) Index and the Goslon Yardstick. Differences in MHB and Goslon scores among the 2 surgical groups adjusted for cleft size. The crude analysis showed no difference between the 2 surgical groups in Goslon scores but a better MHB (P = .006) for the group who received delayed hard palate closure. When adjusting for the ratio between cleft surface and palatal surface (3D Infant Cleft Severity Ratio) and for posterior cleft dimensions at tuberosity level, the delayed hard palate closure group received 3.65 points better for MHB (confidence interval: 1.81; 5.48; P < .001) and showed a trend for reduced risk of receiving a Goslon of 4 or 5 (P = .052). For posterior clefts larger than 9 mm, the Goslon score was better in the delayed hard palate closure group (P = .033). Seen from an orthodontic perspective, when the soft palate is closed first, and the cleft is large, the timing of hard palate closure should be planned in relation to posterior cleft size.

Scandcleft Project, Trial 1: Comparison of Speech Outcome in Relation to Timing of Hard Palate Closure in 5-Year-Olds With UCLP.

To compare in-depth speech results in Scandcleft Trial 1 as well as reference data from peers without cleft palate (CP). A prospective randomized clinical trial. A Danish and a Swedish CP center. 143 of 148 randomized 5-year-olds with unilateral cleft lip and palate. All received lip and velum closure at 4 months, and hard palate closure at 12 months (arm A) or 36 months (arm B). A composite measure based on velopharyngeal competence (VPC) or velopharyngeal incompetence (VPI), an overall assessment of VPC from connected speech (VPC-Rate), Percentage of Consonants Correct (PCC-score), and consonant errors. Speech therapy visits, average hearing thresholds, and secondary pharyngeal surgeries documented burden of treatment. Across the trial, 61.5% demonstrated VPC and 38.5% VPI. Twenty-two percent of participants achieved age appropriate PCC-scores. There were no statistically significant differences between arms or centers for these measures. In the Danish center, arm B: achieved lower PCC-scores (P = .01); obtained PCC-scores without s-errors below 79% (P = .002); produced ≥3 active oral cleft speech characteristics (P = .004) than arm A. In both centers, arm B attended more speech visits. At age 5, differences between centers and treatment arms were not statistically significant for VPC/VPI, but consonant proficiency differed between treatment arms in the Danish center. Poor speech outcomes were seen for both treatment arms. Variations between centers were observed. As the Swedish center had few participants, intercenter comparisons should be interpreted with caution.

Influence of timing of delayed hard palate closure on articulation skills in 3-year-old Danish children with unilateral cleft lip and palate.

Differing results regarding articulation skills in young children with cleft palate (CP) have been reported and often interpreted as a consequence of different surgical protocols. To assess the influence of different timing of hard palate closure in a two-stage procedure on articulation skills in 3-year-olds born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Secondary aims were to compare results with peers without CP, and to investigate if there are gender differences in articulation skills. Furthermore, burden of treatment was to be estimated in terms of secondary surgery, hearing and speech therapy. A randomized controlled trial (RCT). Early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months versus late hard palate closure (LHPC) at 36 months in a two-stage procedure was tested in a cohort of 126 Danish-speaking children born with non-syndromic UCLP. All participants had the lip and soft palate closed around 4 months of age. Audio and video recordings of a naming test were available from 113 children (32 girls and 81 boys) and were transcribed phonetically. Recordings were obtained prior to hard palate closure in the LHPC group. The main outcome measures were percentage consonants correct adjusted (PCC-A) and consonant errors from blinded assessments. Results from 36 Danish-speaking children without CP obtained previously by Willadsen in 2012 were used for comparison. Children with EHPC produced significantly more target consonants correctly (83%) than children with LHPC (48%; p < .001). In addition, children with LHPC produced significantly more active cleft speech characteristics than children with EHPC (p < .001). Boys achieved significantly lower PCC-A scores than girls (p = .04) and produced significantly more consonant errors than girls (p = .02). No significant differences were found between groups regarding burden of treatment. The control group performed significantly better than the EHPC and LHPC groups on all compared variables.

Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary development in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate during the first six years of life.

The purpose of this work was to analyse early upper-jaw development in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) treated using two different concepts and to compare shape and size developments between these two groups and a group of noncleft patients. A total of 204 maxillary casts available for this study from 50 UCLP patients were analyzed for upper-jaw development based on three-dimensional measurements performed with a Reflex Microscope from birth up to 71 months of age. Thirty-five of these 50 patients were part of an early treatment group (two-stage cleft closure with single-stage palatoplasty at an age of 10-14 months) and 15 were part of a late treatment group (two-stage cleft closure with palatoplasty at an age of 4-7years). The control group included 39 casts of 17 noncleft patients. Analysis of shape and size between the patients in the three groups yielded statistically significant differences between the cleft and the noncleft patients. In both treatment groups, we made observations typically associated with cleft formation like lateralization, asymmetry of the greater and lesser cleft segments, and pronounced vertical deviations of the segments. Viewed in all dimensions, however, the patients in the early treatment group approached the control group more closely, although a statistically significant difference was still observed. Our results suggest that the timing of hard-palate closure is not a decisive factor for upper-jaw development. Intrinsic factors (initial cleft width, presence of tooth buds) and the surgeon's skills appear to have a much more defining role.

The impact of cleft lip and palate repair on maxillofacial growth.

Surgical correction is central to current team-approached cleft treatment. Cleft surgeons are always concerned about the impact of their surgical maneuver on the growth of the maxilla. Hypoplastic maxilla, concaved mid-face and deformed dental arch have constantly been reported after cleft treatments. It is very hard to completely circumvent these postoperative complications by current surgical protocols. In this paper, we discussed the factors that inhibit the maxillofacial growth on cleft patients. These factors included pre-surgical intervention, the timing of cleft palate and alveolae repair, surgical design and treatment protocol. Also, we made a review about the influence on the maxillary growth in un-operated cleft patients. On the basis of previous researches, we can conclude that most of scholars express identity of views in these aspects: early palatoplasty lead to maxilla growth inhibition in all dimensions; secondary alveolar bone graft had no influence on maxilla sagittal growth; cleft lip repair inhibited maxilla sagittal length in patients with cleft lip and palate; Veau's pushback palatoplasty and Langenbeck's palatoplasty with relaxing incisions were most detrimental to growth; Furlow palatoplasty showed little detrimental effect on maxilla growth; timing of hard palate closure, instead of the sequence of hard or soft palate repair, determined the postoperative growth. Still, scholars hold controversial viewpoints in some issues, for example, un-operated clefts have normal growth potential or not, pre-surgical intervention and pharyngoplasty inhibited maxillofacial growth or not.

Influence of Timing of Hard Palate Repair in a Two-Stage Procedure on Early Speech Development in Danish Children with Cleft Palate

To investigate the influence of timing of hard palate closure on early speech development from 18 months to 3 years of age. A prospective, randomized clinical trial. Thirty-four children with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) with velum closure at 4 months of age, and hard palate closure at 12 months (early hard palate repair, EarlyHPR) or 36 months (late hard palate unrepaired, LateHPU) by random assignment. Thirty-five control children were matched for gender and age. All children were video recorded during a play interaction with a parent at 18 months of age. These recordings were transcribed according to the International Phonetic Alphabet. At 36 months a single word naming test was administered. At 18 months the LateHPU group produced fewer labial stops and more velar stops than the EarlyHPR group. Unlike the EarlyHPR group, the LateHPU group produced fewer vocalizations, consonants, and consonants permissible in word-initial position than the control group. Additionally, both cleft palate groups had a smaller productive vocabulary than the control group, but unlike the EarlyHPR group, the LateHPU group produced a smaller number of word tokens in social interaction than the control group. By 3 years of age, the LateHPU group had a (severely) restricted phonological system and produced more cleft speech characteristics than the EarlyHPR group. Surgical timing of hard palate repair in a two-stage procedure appears to have an influence on early speech development in children with cleft palate.

One- or Two-Stage Palate Closure in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: Comparing Cephalometric and Occlusal Outcomes

To assess facial growth and dentoalveolar development in two groups of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Primary surgical treatment differed in the timing of hard palate closure. Forty-three patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate were examined. Twenty-two patients underwent early one-stage closure of the hard and soft palate cleft (mean age 23.0 +/- 4.7 months); in 21 patients, the hard palate closure was delayed to 86.3 +/- 39.2 months of age. Lateral cephalograms and dental casts were consecutively analyzed at four stages between 6 and 18 years of age. Lateral cephalometric analysis revealed no significant intergroup differences in the sagittal and vertical craniofacial dimensions at any time. Dental cast analysis showed constriction of the upper anterior arch width at the ages of 6 and 10 years in patients with one-stage surgical palate closure, but a difference could no longer be verified at the ages of 15 and 18 years. The transverse distances in the upper jaw developed initially more positively in the group with delayed hard palate closure, but it became apparent later that the transverse deficiency after one-stage palate closure could be compensated for. When considering surgical treatment in general, the advantages of the delayed hard palate closure must be weighed against criteria favoring the early one-stage closure of the hard and soft palate.

Timing of hard palate closure and dental arch relationships in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: a mixed-longitudinal study: A. E. M. Noverraz, A. M Kuijpers-Jagtman, M. Mars, M. A. van't Hof. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30: 391–396

Timing of hard palate closure and dental arch relationships in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: a mixed-longitudinal study: A. E. M. Noverraz, A. M Kuijpers-Jagtman, M. Mars, M. A. van't Hof. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30: 391–396

Timing of Hard Palate Closure and Dental Arch Relationships in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: A Mixed-Longitudinal Study

In a mixed longitudinal study, dental arch relationships of 88 consecutive UCLP patients treated at the Nijmegen Cleft Palate Centre were evaluated using the Goslon Yardstick. On the basis of timing of hard palate closure, the patients were divided into four groups. Mean age of hard palate closure the patients were divided into four groups. Mean age of hard palate closure in group A (n = 18) was 1.5 years, in group B (n = 26) 4.6 years and in group C (n = 18) 9.4 years. In group D (n = 26, no patient older than 10 years) the hard palate was still open. Four stages of dental development were distinguished; deciduous dentition, early mixed dentition, late mixed dentition and permanent dentition. Reproducibility of scoring with the Goslon Yardstick was good for all stages of dental development. No differences in dental arch relationships were found between the four groups. In 86% of the cases, the dental arch relationships of UCLP patients treated in Nijmegen were acceptable. Pharyngeal flap surgery had minor unfavorable effects on dental arch relationships.

Timing of Hard Palate Closure and Dental Arch Relationships in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: A Mixed-Longitudinal Study

In a mixed longitudinal study, dental arch relationships of 88 consecutive UCLP patients treated at the Nijmegen Cleft Palate Centre were evaluated using the Goslon Yardstick. On the basis of timing of hard palate closure, the patients were divided into four groups. Mean age of hard palate closure the patients were divided into four groups. Mean age of hard palate closure in group A (n = 18) was 1.5 years, in group B (n = 26) 4.6 years and in group C (n = 18) 9.4 years. In group D (n = 26, no patient older than 10 years) the hard palate was still open. Four stages of dental development were distinguished; deciduous dentition, early mixed dentition, late mixed dentition and permanent dentition. Reproducibility of scoring with the Goslon Yardstick was good for all stages of dental development. No differences in dental arch relationships were found between the four groups. In 86% of the cases, the dental arch relationships of UCLP patients treated in Nijmegen were acceptable. Pharyngeal flap surgery had minor unfavorable effects on dental arch relationships.

Effects of early maxillary orthopaedics in coordination with delayed surgery for cleft lip and palate

Summary In the coordinated management of cleft lip and palate patients as carried out in Zurich since 1969/70, early maxillary orthopaedic treatment is indispensable in order to: meet functional requirements while surgical intervention is postponed in order to minimize subsequent growth disturbance, create optimal conditions for the maxillary segments to develop their entire growth potential, maintain or improve arch form, control effects of surgical lip closure. The orthopaedic appliance used is a plate of compound soft and hard acrylic resin. Lip surgery is performed at about 6 months of age, velar at closure at 18 months. The hard palate is left untouched up to an age when growth of the anterior maxillary arch is practically completed, timing of hard palate closure depending on speech proficiency as well as on dental development. In spite of a wide variation of arch size and width at birth, normalization of arch form occurs within the first one and a half years of life, due to the considerable growth rate, which is similar to that in normals. At the 5 year age level, the median values of postgingival width and alveolar crest length closely approximate those of a non-cleft sample. Speech development is not relevantly impaired by two-stage palatal closure.