To examine the association of cleft severity at infancy and velopharyngeal competence in preschool children with unilateral cleft lip and palate operated with early or delayed hard palate repair.
Design:
Subgroup analysis within a multicenter randomized controlled trial of primary surgery (Scandcleft).
Setting:
Tertiary health care. One surgical center.
Patients and Methods:
One hundred twenty-five infants received cheilo-rhinoplasty and soft palate repair at age 3 to 4 months and were randomized to hard palate closure at age 12 or 36 months. Cleft size and cleft morphology were measured 3 dimensionally on digital models, obtained by laser surface scanning of preoperative plaster models (mean age: 1.8 months).
Main outcome measurements:
Velopharyngeal competence (VPC) and hypernasality assessed from a naming test (VPC-Sum) and connected speech (VPC-Rate). In both scales, higher scores indicated a more severe velopharyngeal insufficiency.
Results:
No difference between surgical groups was shown. A low positive correlation was found between posterior cleft width and VPC-Rate (Spearman = .23; P = .025). The role of the covariate “cleft size at tuberosity level” was confirmed in an ordinal logistic regression model (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.01-1.35). A low negative correlation was shown between anteroposterior palatal length and VPC-Sum (Spearman = −.27; P = .004) and confirmed by the pooled scores VPC-Pooled (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.69-0.98) and VPC-Dichotomic (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68-0.99).
Conclusions:
Posterior cleft dimensions can be a modest indicator for the prognosis of velopharyngeal function at age 5 years, when the soft palate is closed first, independently on the timing of hard palate repair. Antero-posterior palatal length seems to protect from velopharyngeal insufficiency and hypernasality. However, the association found was significant but low.
BotticelliSPedersenTKKuselerANorholtSECattaneoPM. Novel 3-D analysis for the assessment of cleft dimensions on digital models of infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;56(1):127–133.
2.
BrittonLAlberyLBowdenMHarding-BellAPhippenGSellD. A cross-sectional cohort study of speech in five-year-olds with cleft palate +/- lip to support development of national audit standards: benchmarking speech standards in the United Kingdom. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014;51(4):431–451.
3.
ChapmanKLHardin-JonesMAGoldsteinJAHalterKAHavlikRJSchulteJ. Timing of palatal surgery and speech outcome. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45(3):297–308.
4.
CohenSRKalinowskiJLaRossaDRandallP. Cleft palate fistulas: a multivariate statistical analysis of prevalence, etiology, and surgical management. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;87(7):1041–1047.
5.
DotevallHEjnellHBakeB. Nasal airflow patterns during the velopharyngeal closing phase in speech in children with and without cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2001;38(4):358–373.
6.
DotevallHLohmander-AgerskovAEjnellHBakeB. Perceptual evaluation of speech and velopharyngeal function in children with and without cleft palate and the relationship to nasal airflow patterns. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002;39(4):409–424.
7.
HardingAGrunwellP. Active versus passive cleft-type speech characteristics. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 1998;33(3):329–352.
8.
HenningssonGEIsbergAM. Velopharyngeal movement patterns in patients alternating between oral and glottal articulation: a clinical and cineradiographical study. Cleft Palate J. 1986;23(1):1–9.
9.
HuttersBBrondstedK. Strategies in cleft palate speech—with special reference to Danish. Cleft Palate J. 1987;24(2):126–136.
10.
JohnsonNWilliamsASingerSSouthallPSandyJ. Initial cleft size does not correlate with outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod. 2000;22(1):93–100.
11.
LamDJChiuLLSieKCPerkinsJA. Impact of cleft width in clefts of secondary palate on the risk of velopharyngeal insufficiency. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2012;14(5):360–364.
12.
LandheerJABreugemCCvan der MolenAB. Fistula incidence and predictors of fistula occurrence after cleft palate repair: two-stage closure versus one-stage closure. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(6):623–630.
13.
LatiefBSLekkasKCScholsJGFudalejPSKuijpersMA. Width and elevation of the palatal shelves in unoperated unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate patients in the permanent dentition. J Anat. 2012;220(3):263–270.
14.
LiaoYFPrasadNKChiuYTYunCChenPK. Cleft size at the time of palate repair in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate as an indicator of maxillary growth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(10):956–961.
15.
LinKYBlackJSWangJSKerpelmanJHoTVBorowitzK. An outcome study of a 2-flap pushback palatoplasty used in the treatment of wide cleft palates. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(3):620–624.
16.
LohmanderAFriedeHElanderAPerssonCLiljaJ. Speech development in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate treated with different delays in closure of the hard palate after early velar repair: a longitudinal perspective. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2006;40(5):267–274.
17.
LohmanderAFriedeHLiljaJ. Long-term, longitudinal follow-up of individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate after the Gothenburg primary early veloplasty and delayed hard palate closure protocol: speech outcome. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49(6):657–671.
18.
LohmanderAHagbergEPerssonCWilladsenELundeborgIDaviesJHavstamCBoersMKisling-MollerMAlaluusuaS, et al.Validity of auditory perceptual assessment of velopharyngeal function and dysfunction—the VPC-Sum and the VPC-Rate. Clin Linguist Phon. 2017a;31(7-9):589–597.
19.
LohmanderAPerssonCWilladsenELundeborgIAlaluusuaSAuknerRBauABoersMBowdenMDaviesJ, et al.Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 4. Speech outcomes in 5-year-olds—velopharyngeal competency and hypernasality. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017b;51(1):27–37.
20.
Lohmander-AgerskovAFriedeHSoderpalmELiljaJ. Residual clefts in the hard palate: correlation between cleft size and speech. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997;34(2):122–128.
21.
MarrinanEMLaBrieRAMullikenJB. Velopharyngeal function in nonsyndromic cleft palate: relevance of surgical technique, age at repair, and cleft type. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998;35(2):95–100.
22.
MurthyASParikhPMCristionCThomassenMVenturiMBoyajianMJ. Fistula after 2-flap palatoplasty: a 20-year review. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;63(6):632–635.
23.
MuzaffarARByrdHSRohrichRJJohnsDFLeBlancDBeranSJAndersonCPapaioannou aAA. Incidence of cleft palate fistula: an institutional experience with two-stage palatal repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(6):1515–1518.
24.
NybergJPetersonPLohmanderA. Speech outcomes at age 5 and 10 years in unilateral cleft lip and palate after one-stage palatal repair with minimal incision technique—a longitudinal perspective. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014;78(10):1662–1670.
25.
ParwazMASharmaRKParasharANandaVBiswasGMakkarS. Width of cleft palate and postoperative palatal fistula—do they correlate?J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62(12):1559–1563.
26.
PhuaYSde ChalainT. Incidence of oronasal fistulae and velopharyngeal insufficiency after cleft palate repair: an audit of 211 children born between 1990 and 2004. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45(2):172–178.
27.
RautioJAndersenMBolundSHukkiJVindenesHDavenportPArctanderKLarsonOBerggrenAAbyholmF, et al.Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 2. Surgical results. J Plast Surg Hand Surg.2017;51(1):14–20.
28.
ReddyRRGosla ReddySVaidhyanathanABergeSJKuijpers-JagtmanAM. Maxillofacial growth and speech outcome after one-stage or two-stage palatoplasty in unilateral cleft lip and palate. A systematic review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(6):995–1003.
29.
ReiserESkoogVGerdinBAndlin-SobockiA. Association between cleft size and crossbite in children with cleft palate and unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(2):175–181.
30.
RussellLMLongREJrRombergE. The effect of cleft size in infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate on mixed dentition dental arch relationship. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2015;52(5):605–613.
31.
SellD. Issues in perceptual speech analysis in cleft palate and related disorders: a review. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2005;40(2):103–121.
32.
SellDMildinhallSAlberyLWillsAKSandyJRNessAR. The cleft care UK study. Part 4: perceptual speech outcomes. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015;18(suppl 2):36–46.
33.
SembG. International confederation for cleft lip and palate and related craniofacial anomalies task force report: beyond Eurocleft. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014;51(6):e146–e155.
34.
SembGEnemarkHFriedeHPaulinGLiljaJRautioJAndersenMAbyholmFLohmanderAShawW, et al.A Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 1. Planning and management. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017;51(1):2–13.
35.
ShawWSembG. The Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 11. What next?J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017;51(1):88–93.
36.
TeblickSRuymaekersMVan de CasteeleENadjmiN. Effect of cleft palate closure technique on speech and middle ear outcome: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;77(2):405.e1–405.e15.
37.
WilladsenELohmanderAPerssonCLundeborgIAlaluusuaSAuknerRBauABoersMBowdenMDaviesJ, et al.Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 5. Speech outcomes in 5-year-olds - consonant proficiency and errors. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017;51(1):38–51. doi:10.1080/2000656X.2016.1254647.
38.
WuRCheraghlouSParsaeiYTraviesoRSteinbacherDM. Does cleft palate width correlate with veau classification and outcome?J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28(5):1369–1374.
39.
YuanNDorafsharAHFollmarKEPendletonCFergusonKRedettRJ3rd. Effects of cleft width and veau type on incidence of palatal fistula and velopharyngeal insufficiency after cleft palate repair. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(4):406–410.
40.
ZraickRILissJMDormanMFCaseJLLaPointeLLBealsSP. Multidimensional scaling of nasal voice quality. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000;43(4):989–996.
