Search

Objective: To evaluate the stature of Russian children with cleft lip and palate (CLP)., Design: One hundred twelve Russian children predominantly with repaired unilateral CLP 4 through 10 years of age underwent studies including height measurement, physical examinations, and record review. Children with health concerns that could affect growth were excluded. U.S. growth data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and Russian parental heights were used in the absence of Russian growth norms., Results: Based on U.S. norms, the distribution curve for heights for the Russian children was largely confined to the +1 to -1 standard deviation (SD) range. Sixty-two percent of the Russian children had heights below the 50th percentile for American female and male children of the same age. The proportion of children found outside the +1 to -1 SD range approximated the proportion expected statistically for the general population, with 14.4% < -1 SD (16th percentile) and 12% > +1 SD (84th percentile). A total of 3.6% of the children ranked below the third percentile, which is close to the expected 3%. Russian parents' (n = 209) mean heights were 0.5 SD below NCHS's 50th percentile values for adults., Conclusion: These results indicate that there is no increased risk of true short stature in 4- to 10-year-old Russian children with repaired CLP.

Objective: In this study, researchers evaluated the otologic and audiologic status of 112 children with repaired cleft lip and palate who had received primary palatal repair by means of Frolova palatoplasty, a surgical technique developed by Dr. Larisa Y. Frolova, founder and director of the National Pediatric Center for Congenital Maxillofacial Pathology, Moscow, Russia., Design: Results of hearing thresholds and tympanograms for these Russian children were compared with data previously reported from a group of 48 children and adults with repaired cleft lip and palate at the University of Florida Craniofacial Center, Gainesville, Florida., Results: There were no substantial differences in hearing thresholds between the two groups, which was surprising in view of the vast differences between middle ear management techniques used in Russia and the United States., Conclusions: Considering these findings and the growing body of literature favoring a more conservative approach to the management of middle ear effusion in infants with cleft lip and palate, a reexamination of otologic strategies in the United States seems advisable.