To conduct a systematic review of the data in peer-reviewed medical literature and evaluate the effectiveness of lip taping as a pre-surgical naso-alveolar molding (NAM) technique in infants with cleft lip and/or palate.
Design
An electronic search of various databases for relevant studies, regardless of date, from inception to June 2023 was carried out and evaluated. After completing the electronic search and applying our inclusion/exclusion criteria, 6 studies—2 randomized control trials, 2 non-randomized studies, and 2 case series—were included. Data extraction of relevant articles was done independently by 2 authors. Quality assessment was done using the JBI prevalence critical appraisal tool and certainty of evidence was carried out by GRADE approach.
A total of six studies were included in the current review. Meta-analysis was carried out, and forest plots were obtained for a single mean from the lip-taping group. 3 studies had a low risk of bias, while 3 studies displayed a serious risk of bias. Significant improvement in various outcome measures was noted with lip taping when compared with the control group although the certainty of evidence was very low.
Conclusion
When compared to no therapy, lip taping appears to ameliorate dentoalveolar measurements and nasolabial aesthetics. To increase our knowledge of lip taping, more research will be needed in the future, as there are not many studies to prove lip taping is better than other treatment approaches.
FisherMDFisherDMMarcusJR. Correction of the cleft nasal deformity: from infancy to maturity. Clin Plast Surg. 2014;41(2):283‐299. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2014.01.002
2.
NahaiFRWilliamsJKBursteinFDMartinJThomasJ. The management of cleft lip and palate: pathways for treatment and longitudinal assessment. Semin Plast Surg. 2005;19(4):275‐285. doi:https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-925900.
3.
BerkowitzS. Cleft Lip and Palate: Diagnosis and Management. Springer; 2013.
4.
MosseyPAModellB. Epidemiology of oral clefts 2012: an international perspective. Front Oral Biol. 2012;16:1‐18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000337464.
5.
GorlinRJCohenMMHennekamRCM. Syndromes of the Head and Neck. Oxford University Press; 2001.
6.
MosseyPACastillaEE. Global Registry and Database on Craniofacial Anomalies: Report of a WHO Registry Meeting on Craniofacial Anomalies. World Health Organization; 2001.
GnoinskiWM. Infant orthopaedics and later orthodontic monitoring for unilateral cleft lip and palate patients in Zurich. In: Multidisciplinary Management of Cleft Lip And Palate. WB Saunders; 1990:578‐585.
9.
PrahlCKuijpers-JagtmanAMvan’t HofMAPrahl-AndersenB. A randomised prospective clinical trial into the effect of infant orthopaedics on maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate (Dutchcleft). Eur J Oral Sci. 2001;109(5):297‐305. doi:https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0722.2001.00056.x.
10.
McNeilCK. Orthodontic procedures in the treatment of congenital cleft palate. Dent Rec (London). 1950;70(5):126‐132.
11.
McNeilCK. Oral and Facial Deformity. Pitman and Sons; 1954:14‐25.
12.
MatsuoKHiroseT. Nonsurgical correction of cleft lip nasal deformity in the early neonate. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1988;17(3):358‐365.
GraysonBHCuttingCB. Presurgical naso- alveolar orthopaedic 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:https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_2001_038_0193_pnomip_2.0.co_2.
15.
BerggrenA.Surgical tape and the nasal alar elevator-two simple and useful tools in the early preoperative treatment of cleft lip patients. In: International Congress of cleft lip-palate and craniofacial Anomalies, 2001 Jun 25.
16.
BerggrenAAbdiuAMarcussonAPaulinG. The nasal alar elevator: an effective tool in the presurgical treatment of infants born with cleft lip. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;115(6):1785‐1787. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000162110.83406.58.
17.
PoolRFarnworthTK. Preoperative lip taping in the cleft lip. Ann Plast Surg. 1994;32:243‐249.
18.
DawjeeSMJulyanJCKrynauwJC. Lip tape therapy in patients with a cleft lip–a report on eight cases. SADJ. 2014;69(2):62‐70.
19.
MonasterioLFordAGutiérrezCTastetsMEGarcíaJ. Comparative study of naso- alveolar molding methods: nasal elevator plus DynaCleft® versus NAM-Grayson in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50(5):548‐554. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/11-245.
20.
Abd El-GhafourMAboulhassanMAEl-BeialyAR, et al.Is taping alone an efficient presurgical infant orthopaedic approach in infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate? A randomized controlled trial. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020;57(12):1382‐1391. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620944757.
21.
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. University of York; 2009. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/.
22.
BaderJIsmailA. ADA council on scientific affairs; division of science; journal of the American dental association. Survey of systematic reviews in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 2004;135(4):464‐473. doi:https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0212.
23.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Br Med J. 2021;372:n71. Published 2021 Mar 29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71.
24.
HigginsJPGreenS. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.
25.
Amir-BehghadamiMJanatiA. Population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) design as a framework to formulate eligibility criteria in systematic reviews. Emerg Med J. 2020;37(6):387. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2020-209567.
26.
SterneJACSavovićJPageMJ, et al.Rob 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Br Med J. 2019;366:l4898. Published 2019 Aug 28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898.
27.
SterneJAHernánMAReevesBC, et al.ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Br Med J. 2016;355:i4919. Published 2016 Oct 12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919.
28.
McGuinnessLAHigginsJPT. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods. 2021;12(1):55‐61. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1411.
29.
MunnZBarkerTHMoolaS, et al.Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool. JBI Evid Synth. 2020;18(10):2127‐2133. doi:https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00099.
BarkerTHStoneJCSearsK, et al.The revised JBI critical appraisal tool for the assessment of risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. JBI Evid Synth. 2023;21(3):494‐506. Published 2023 Mar 1. doi:https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00430.
32.
WallaceBCDahabrehIJTrikalinosTALauJTrowPSchmidCH. Closing the gap between methodologists and End-users: r as a computational back-end. J Stat Soft. 2012;49(5):1‐15.
GuyattGOxmanADAklEA, et al.GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):383‐394. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026.
35.
SchünemannHBrożekJGuyattGOxmanAD. The GRADE Handbook. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2013. http://gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/central_prod/_design/client/handbook/handbook.html
36.
Abd El-GhafourMAboulhassanMAEl-BeialyAR, et al.Does presurgical taping change nose and lip aesthetics in infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate? A randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2022;150(6):1300e‐1313e. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000009738.
37.
AbhinavBABatraPChander SoodSSharmaKSrivastavaARaghavanS. Comparative study of presurgical infant orthopaedics by modified grayson method and dynacleft with nasal elevators in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate-A clinical prospective study. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2021;58(2):189‐201. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620948630.
38.
HosseiniHRKaklamanosEGAthanasiouAE. Treatment outcomes of pre-surgical infant orthopaedics 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):e0181768. Published 2017 Jul 24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181768.
39.
GraysonBHMaullD. Naso- alveolar molding for infants born with clefts of the lip, alveolus, and palate. Semin Plast Surg. 2005;19(4):294‐301. doi:https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-925902
40.
LaxmikanthSMKaragiTShettyAShettyS. Naso- alveolar molding: a review. J Adv Clin Res Insights2014;1(3):108‐113.
41.
WilhelmsenHRMusgraveRH. Complications of cleft lip surgery. Cleft Palate J. 1966;3:223‐231.
NagyKMommaertsMY. Lip adhesion revisited: a technical note with review of literature. Indian J Plast Surg. 2009;42(2):204‐212. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0358.59283.
46.
ThierschC. Elasticher heft-pflaster-verband zur vor- und nachbehandlung der hasen-scharte. Verhandl Deutsch Gesellsch. 1875;4:63-69.
47.
BrownGVI. A system for the surgical correction of harelip and cleft palate. Int Dent J (Phila). 1905;26(7):417‐453.
48.
DunworthKPorras FimbresDTrottaR, et al.Systematic review and critical appraisal of the evidence base for naso- alveolar molding (NAM) [published online ahead of print, 2022 Nov 4]. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022:10556656221136325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656221136325.
49.
MoherDHopewellSSchulzKF, et al.CONSORT 2010 Explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Br Med J. 2010;340:c869. Published 2010 Mar 23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c869.
50.
HowickJChalmersIGlasziouP, et al.The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine; 2011.
51.
NiranjanePPKambleRHDiagavaneSP, et al.Current status of presurgical infant orthopaedic treatment for cleft lip and palate patients: a critical review. Indian J Plast Surg. 2014;47(3):293‐302. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0358.146573.
52.
TugwellPBoersMBrooksPSimonLStrandVIdzerdaL. OMERACT: an international initiative to improve outcome measurement in rheumatology. Trials. 2007;8:38. Published 2007 Nov 26. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-8-38
53.
SandyJKilpatrickNIrelandA. Treatment outcome for children born with cleft lip and palate. Front Oral Biol. 2012;16:91‐100. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000337620.
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.
