Search

Objective: The aims of the study were to assess the postoperative oronasal fistula rate after 1-stage and 2-stage cleft palate repair and identify risk factors associated with its development. Design: Systematic review. Setting: Various primary cleft and craniofacial centers in the world. Patients, Participants: Syndromic and nonsyndromic cleft lip, alveolus, and palate patients who had undergone primary cleft palate surgery. Intervention: Assessment of oronasal fistula frequency and correlation with staging, timing, and technique of repair, gender, and Veau type. The results obtained in this systematic review were compared with those in previous reports. Outcome: The main outcome is represented by the occurrence of the oronasal fistula after 1-stage versus 2-stage palatoplasty. Results: The mean fistula percentage was 9.94%. In the Veau I, II, III, and IV groups, the respective fistula rates were 2%, 7.3%, 8.3%, and 12.5%. Oronasal fistula locations based on the Pittsburgh Fistula Classification System were soft palate (type II), 16.2%; soft palate–hard palate junction (type III), 29.3%; and hard palate (type IV), 37.3%. There were no statistically significant differences between 1-stage and 2-stage palatoplasty, syndromic and nonsyndromic, or male and female patients. Primary palatoplasty timing was not a significant predictor. Conclusion: Some disparities arose when comparing studies, mainly regarding location and types of clefting prone to oronasal fistulation. Interestingly, the fistula rate does not differ between 1- and 2-stage closure, and timing of the repair does not play a role.

Purpose This study served to evaluate a two-stage concept in cleft palate repair, including key use of a triangular hinge (“flip-over”) flap, in order to prevent palatal fistulae. It uses data from a prospective registry established in 1991. Materials and methods The concept entails Furlow soft palate repair (at 1 year of age) and hard palate closure (at 4 years) by a three-pronged approach [paring of the edges with or without postero-lateral relaxing incisions, peninsula (Veau) flap(s)], plus a triangular hinge flap. The latter is elevated from the oral layer of the already-repaired soft palate, stays based anteriorly, and is flipped over to close the posterior nasal layer defect. The case series is compared with data from the literature. Results The palatal fistula rate for Veau II to IV types (two-stage surgeries) was 4.3%. The overall fistula rate in the cleft population (Veau I–IV) was 2.9%. Meta-analyses describe 4.9 and 8.6% on average. There was no difference between sample A in which the flip-over flaps were used only when modified Veau flaps were indicated (until 2006) and sample B in which it was used regardless of the technique of hard palate closure applied (2006–2018). The fistula rate decreased to zero after 2010, which may reflect also an influence of other factors such as the interpositioning of a collagen membrane and also of improved surgical judgment. Conclusions Using a flip-over flap in two-stage cleft palate repair may contribute to prevent fistula formation at the hard/soft palate junction. Level of evidence III.

Residual bilateral cleft lip deformities are commonly attributed to neglect of oral sphincter reconstruction during primary repair. This report describes a straightforward technique for reoperation that is applicable for most patients. It also describes the results of a retrospective observational cohort study of 21 patients that underwent reoperation performed by the senior author (MYM) from 1991 to 2018. The patients had undergone primary lip repair at other institutions. Their mean age at reoperation was 17 years. Pre‑ and post‑operative photographs (at 3.5 years’ postoperation) were assessed for 15 parameters. Overall configuration, scar appearance, philtrum anatomy, Cupid’s bow shape, and esthetic aspects of lip dynamics improved considerably. This procedure is the same as that used by the authors in 4‑month‑old children who have undergone a nasolabial adhesion procedure at 4 weeks of age. We discuss the rationale of using this procedure for primary lip repair, thus eliminating the need for reoperation.