The aim is to compare the facial esthetics following nasoalveolar molding (NAM) versus computer-aided design NAM (CAD/NAM) in patients with bilateral cleft lip/palate (CLP).
Design
The trial is a randomized comparative trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.
Participants
Thirty infants with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate were recruited.
Interventions
Patients were randomized between NAM and CAD/NAM groups. The treatment steps described by Grayson were followed for the NAM group. In the CAD/NAM group, digitized maxillary models were made to create a series of modified virtual models, which were used to fabricate the molding plates using 3-dimensional printing technology. The nasal stents were then added to the intraoral plates following the Grayson method. The study lasted for 4 months.
Main Outcomes
The assessment of the changes observed in the interlabial gap and nasolabial esthetics was done using standardized 2-dimensional photographs. The correlation between dental arch changes and extraoral facial esthetics was studied.
Results
Both modalities showed improvement in nasolabial esthetics before the lip surgery. No statistically significant difference was found between NAM and CAD/NAM groups in any of the assessed variables.
Conclusions
Both interventions were effective in the management of infants with bilateral CLP.
Rossell-PerryPOlivencia-FloresCDelgado-JimenezMPOrmeño-AquinoR. Surgical nasoalveolar molding: a rational treatment for bilateral cleft lip nose and systematic review. Plast Reconstr Surg – Glob Open. 2020;8(9):e3082. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000003082.
2.
GraysonBHCuttingCB. Presurgical nasoalveolar orthopedic molding in primary correction of the nose, lip, and alveolus of infants born with unilateral and bilateral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2001;38(3):193-198. doi:10.1597/1545-1569(2001)038<0193:PNOMIP>2.0.CO;2.
3.
CuttingCGraysonBBrechtLSantiagoPWoodRKwonS. Presurgical columellar elongation and primary retrograde nasal reconstruction in one-stage bilateral cleft lip and nose repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101(3):630-639. http://search.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/en/mdl-9500379
4.
PadovanoWMSkolnickGBNaidooSDSnyder-WarwickAKPatelKB. Long-term effects of nasoalveolar molding in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2022;59(4):462-474. doi: 10.1177/10556656211009702
5.
ShenCYaoCAMageeWIIIChaiGZhangY. Presurgical nasoalveolar molding for cleft lip and palate: the application of digitally designed molds. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(6):1007e-1015e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000001286
6.
SingerEDaskalogiannakisJRussellKA, Mercado A, Hathaway R, Stoutland A, Long Jr A, Fessler J, Semb G, Shaw W.Burden of care of various infant orthopedic protocols for improvement of nasolabial esthetics in patients with CUCLP. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2018;55(9):1236-1243. doi:10.1177/1055665618766978.
7.
GongXDangRXuTYuQZhengJ. Full digital workflow of nasoalveolar molding treatment in infants with cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(2):367-371. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000006258.
8.
AbdelghafourMAboulhassanMAFayedMMSEl-BeialyAREidFHKHegabSEEl-GendiMEmaraD, Effectiveness of a novel 3D-printed nasoalveolar molding appliance (D-NAM) on improving the maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate infants: a randomized controlled trial. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2020;57(12):1370-1381. doi:10.1177/1055665620954321.
9.
LoeffelbeinDJRitschlLMRauAWolffKDBarbarinoMPfeiferSSchönbergerMWintermantelE. Analysis of computer-aided techniques for virtual planning in nasoalveolar moulding. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;53(5):455-460. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.03.002.
10.
BauerFXSchönbergerMGattingerJEblenkampMWintermantel ERauAGüllFDWolffKDLoeffelbeinDJ. RapidNAM: generative manufacturing approach of nasoalveolar molding devices for presurgical cleft lip and palate treatment. 2017;8713:1-8. doi:10.1515/bmt-2016-0035.
11.
BatraPGribelBFAbhinavBAAroraARaghavanS. Orthoaligner “NAM”: a case series of presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO) using clear aligners. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2020;57(5):646-655. doi:10.1177/1055665619889807.
12.
ChaudhariPKDhingraKZereE. Digital presurgical infant orthopedics in COVID-19 crisis. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2021;58(10):1331-1334. doi:10.1177/1055665620980230.
13.
BronsSBronkhorstEMDraaismaJBergéSJMaalTJKuijpers-JagtmanAMMethods to quantify soft-tissue based facial growth and treatment outcomes in children: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2012;7(8), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0041898.
14.
MosmullerDGMDon GriotJPWBijnenCLNiessenFB. Scoring systems of cleft-related facial deformities: a review of literature. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2013;50(3):286-296. doi:10.1597/11-207.
15.
KuijpersMARChiuY-TNadaRMCarelsCELFudalejPS. Three-dimensional imaging methods for quantitative analysis of facial soft tissues and skeletal morphology in patients with orofacial clefts: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e93442. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093442.
16.
LadeiraPRVaniniJAlosnsoNBastosE. Use of stereophotogrammetry for evaluating craniofacial deformities: a systematic review. Rev Bras Cir Plast. 2013;28(1):147-155. doi:10.1590/S1983-51752013000100025
17.
HarrisonLMHallacRRDerderianCA. Three-dimensional analysis of bilateral cleft lip and palate nasal deformity. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2021;58(1):105-113. doi:10.1177/1055665620940190.
18.
El-AshmawiNAFayedMMSEl-BeialyAAttiaKH. Evaluation of the clinical effectiveness of nasoalveolar molding (NAM) using Grayson method versus computer-aided design NAM (CAD/NAM) in infants with bilateral cleft lip and palate: a randomized clinical trial. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial J. 2022;59(3):377–389. doi:10.1177/1055665621990152
19.
MoherDHopewellSSchulzKFMontoriVGøtzschePCDevereauxPJElbourneDianaEggerMAltmanDG. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Br Med J. 2010;340:c869. doi:10.1136/bmj.c869.
20.
GraysonBHSantiagoPEBrechtLECuttingCB.Presurgical nasoalveolar molding in infants with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999;36(6):486-498. doi:10.1597/1545-1569(1999)036<0486:PNMIIW>2.3.CO;2.
21.
EttorreGWeberMSchaafHLowryJCMommaertsMYHowaldtHP. Standards for digital photography in cranio-maxillo-facial surgery – part I: basic views and guidelines. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2006;34(2):65-73. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2005.11.002.
22.
SchaafHStreckbeinPEttorreGLowryJCMommaertsMYHowaldtHP. Standards for digital photography in cranio-maxillo-facial surgery – part II: additional picture sets and avoiding common mistakes (DOI:10.1016/j.jcms.2006.04.006). J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2006;34(7):444-455. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2006.08.002
23.
SpenglerALChavarriaCTeichgraeberJFGatenoJXiaJJ. Presurgical nasoalveolar molding therapy for the treatment of bilateral cleft lip and palate: a preliminary study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43(3):321-328. doi:10.1597/05-093.1.
24.
LiaoYFWangYCChenIJPaiCJKoWCWangYC. Comparative outcomes of two nasoalveolar molding techniques for bilateral cleft nose deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133(1):103-110. doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000436827.95321.f2
25.
PapadopoulosMAKoumpridouENVakalisMLPapageorgiouSN. Effectiveness of pre-surgical infant orthopedic treatment for cleft lip and palate patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2012;15(4):207-236. doi:10.1111/j.1601-6343.2012.01552.x
26.
van der HeijdenPDijkstraPUStellingsmaCvan der LaanBFKorsten-MeijerAGWGoorhuis-BrouwerSM. Limited evidence for the effect of presurgical nasoalveolar molding in unilateral cleft on nasal symmetry. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131(1):62e-71e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318267d4a5
27.
HosseiniHRKaklamanosEGAthanasiouAE. Treatment outcomes of pre-surgical infant orthopedics in patients with non-syndromic cleft lip and/or palate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PLoS One. 2017;12(7):1-24. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181768.
28.
FunayamaEYamamotoYOyamaAFurukawaHMuraoNHayashiTMaedaTOsawaM. Comparison of nasal symmetry between presurgical nasal stenting and postsurgical nasal retainer placement in unilateral clefts. J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30(1):133-136. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000004959.
29.
ChangCSLiaoYFWallaceCGChanFCLiouEJChenPKNoordhoffMS. Long-term comparison of the results of four techniques used for bilateral cleft nose repair: a single surgeon’s experience. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134(6):926e-936e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000000715.
30.
Schwenzer-ZimmererKChaitidisDBerg-BoernerIKrolZKovacsLSchwenzerNFZimmererSHolbergC. Quantitative 3D soft tissue analysis of symmetry prior to and after unilateral cleft lip repair compared with non-cleft persons (performed in Cambodia). J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2008;36(8):431-438. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2008.05.003.
31.
ChouPHallacRRAjiweTXieXLiaoYKaneAAParkYJ. The role of nasoalveolar molding: a 3D prospective analysis. Sci Rep. 2017:1-8. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10435-6.
32.
HallacRRFengJKaneAASeawardJR. Dynamic facial asymmetry in patients with repaired cleft lip using 4D imaging (video stereophotogrammetry). J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2017;45(1):8-12. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2016.11.005.
33.
RubinMSCloustonSAhmedMMLoweKMShetyePRBroderHLWarrenSMGraysonBH. Assessment of presurgical clefts and predicted surgical outcome in patients treated with and without nasoalveolar molding. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(1):71-75. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000001233.
34.
PatelPARubnMSCloustonSLalezaradehFBrechtLECuttingCBShetyePRWarrenSMGraysonBH. Comparative study of early secondary nasal revisions and costs in patients with clefts treated with and without nasoalveolar molding. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(4):1229-1233. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000001729.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
