This review aims to summarize existing prospective registries for congenital craniofacial anomalies across the globe.
Design
We conducted a comprehensive review of Embase and the Google Search Engine for articles which gathered data from prospective craniofacial registries and registry websites, respectively. Registry details were verified by registry coordinators where email addresses were available.
Setting
Institutional or national cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) centers.
Main Outcomes
For each registry, we collected coordinating and contributing centers, registry goals, years of operation, number of patients, datapoints collected, funding, and quality assurance mechanisms.
Results
Nine registries were identified. Six focused on CLP, 1 on craniosynostosis, 1 on craniofacial microsomia, and 1 on a range of craniofacial abnormalities. Only European and U.S.-centered registries were identified. Every existing European CLP registry represents all government-supported cleft centers in its respective nation. The 3 U.S.-based registries are expansive, but do not capture a nationwide patient base.
Conclusions
This review characterizes the current global state of prospective registries for research on congenital craniofacial anomalies. The strength and organization of data collection varies greatly by registry and by country, though the present landscape exhibits potential for improvement of craniofacial research and patient outcomes. With this evidence, we advocate for a nationally coordinated registry to improve outcomes for children with craniofacial anomalies across the United States.
ShahMNKaneAAPetersenJDWooASNaidooSDSmythMD. Endoscopically assisted versus open repair of sagittal craniosynostosis: The St. Louis Children's Hospital experience. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2011;8(2):165-170. doi:https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.5.PEDS1128
2.
HaAYSkolnickGBChiD, Nguyen DC, Naidoo SD, Smyth MD, Patel KB.School-aged anthropometric outcomes after endoscopic or open repair of metopic synostosis. Pediatrics. 2020;146(3). doi:https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-0238
3.
TioPAERooijersWde GierHHWPoldermansHGKoudstaalMJCaronC. Velopharyngeal insufficiency, speech, and language impairment in craniofacial microsomia: A scoping review. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024;62(1):30-37. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2023.09.008
VaragurKChryssofosSDouglasTO, Grames LM, Skolnick GB, Naidoo SD, Snyder-Warwick AK, Patel KB.Characterizing age at velopharyngeal dysfunction in patients with cleft palates. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2025;102:123-130. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2025.01.024
6.
VillavisanisDFWagnerCSMoralesCZ, Smith TE, Blum JD, Cho DY, Bartlett SP, Taylor JA, Swanson JW.Geospatial and socioeconomic factors interact to predict management and outcomes in cleft lip and palate surgery: A single institution study of 740 patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2024;61(6):921-929. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656221150291
7.
RogersGF. The future of clinical craniofacial research: A collaborative international craniofacial registry. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32(1):8-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000007078
8.
BeckerDBPetersenJDKaneAACradockMMPilgramTKMarshJL. Speech, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes in nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116(2):400-407. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000172763.71043.b8
ReefhuisJGilboaSMAnderkaM, Browne ML, Feldkamp ML, Hobbs CA, Jenkins MM, Langlois PH, Newsome KB, Olshan AF, et al.The national birth defects prevention study: A review of the methods. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2015;103(8):656-669. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bdra.23384
Global strategies to reduce the health care burden of craniofacial anomalies: Report of WHO meetings on international collaborative research on craniofacial anomalies. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2004;41(3):238-243. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/03-214.1
13.
OmbashiSvan der GoesPAJVersnelSLKhonsariRHvan der MolenAEM. Guidance to develop a multidisciplinary, international, pediatric registry: A systematic review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2023;18(1):296. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-023-02901-4
14.
ParéGKitsiouS. Chapter 9 methods for literature reviews. In: LauFKuziemskyC, eds. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. University of Victoria; 2017. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK481583/.
15.
DaviesAJVHumphriesKLewisSJHoKSandyJRWrenY. The cleft collective: Protocol for a longitudinal prospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2024;14(7):e084737. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084737
16.
StockNMHumphriesKPourcainBS, Bailey M, Persson M, Ho KM, Ring S, Marsh C, Albery L, Rumsey N, Sandy J.Opportunities and challenges in establishing a cohort study: An example from cleft lip/palate research in the United Kingdom. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53(3):317-325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/14-306
17.
WrenYHumphriesKStockNM, Rumsey N, Lewis S, Davies A, Bennett R, Sandy J.Setting up a cohort study in speech and language therapy: Lessons from the UK cleft collective speech and language (CC-SL) study. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2018;53(3):421-430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1460-6984.12364
ButterworthSFitzsimonsKJBrittonL, Van Eeden S, Medina J, van der Meulen J, Russell CJH.Investigating the impact of additional congenital malformations on speech outcomes at age five in children with a cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2024;10556656241287759. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656241287759.
SitzmanTJVerheyEMKirschnerRE, Pollard SH, Baylis AL, Chapman KL, Cleft Outcomes Research NETwork Consortium.Cleft palate repair postoperative management: Current practices in the United States. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2024;61(5):827-833. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656221146891
22.
KlintoKErikssonMAbdiuA, Brunnegard K, Cajander J, Hagberg E, Hakelius M, Havstam C, Mark H, Okhiria A, et al.Inter-centre comparison of data on surgery and speech outcomes at 5 years of age based on the Swedish quality registry for patients born with cleft palate with or without cleft lip. BMC Pediatr. 2022;22(1):303. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-022-03367-2
23.
GjerdevikMLieRTHaalandOABergEFeragenKBSivertsenA. Isolated oral clefts and school grades: Population-based cohort study from Norway. BMJ Open. 2021;11(10):e046944. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046944
24.
BakerCMRavindraVMGocimanB, Siddiqi FA, Goldstein JA, Smyth MD, Lee A, Anderson RCE, Patel KB, Birgfeld C, et al.Management of sagittal synostosis in the synostosis research group: Baseline data and early outcomes. Neurosurg Focus. 2021;50(4):E3. doi:https://doi.org/10.3171/2021.1.FOCUS201029
25.
StockNMCrerandCEJohnsAL, McKinney CM, Koudstaal MJ, Drake AF, Heike CL.Establishing an international interdisciplinary research network in craniofacial microsomia: The CARE program. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2024;61(9):1470-1479. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656231176904
26.
van der GoesPAJOmbashiSvan RoeyV, Hakelius M, Mathijssen IMJ, Mink van der Molen AB, Versnel SL.The development of a European multidisciplinary cleft lip and palate registry by the European reference network CRANIO: Experiences, barriers, and facilitators. J Craniofac Surg. 2024;35(6):1667-1672. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010314
27.
SandyJDaviesAHumphriesKIrelandTWrenY. Cleft lip and palate: Care configuration, national registration, and research strategies. J World Fed Orthod. 2020;9(3S):S40-S44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.09.003
28.
DroletBCLorenziNM. Registries and evidence-based medicine in craniofacial and plastic surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(1):301-303. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e318241dbee
LuijsterburgAJVermeij-KeersC. Ten years recording common oral clefts with a new descriptive system. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2011;48(2):173-182. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/08-150
32.
RochaFLopes SalomaoSGerkA, Kim A, Telles L, Laus Pereira Lima B, Melo de Carvalho M, Martins Rocha C, Alonso N.Timely access for orofacial cleft repairs in a Brazilian Amazon center. J Craniofac Surg. 2024;35(7):1913-1916. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010553
33.
ThompsonJMDAyreySLSlykermanRFStonePRFowlerPV. Quality of life using general population validated questionnaires in children with cleft lip and/or palate in New Zealand. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2021;58(6):779-786. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665620962371
34.
MaoSHAjiweTWangRWongFHChouPYLoLJ. The effectiveness of an international cleft mission model in Asia: An update. Ann Plast Surg. 2019;82(1S Suppl 1):S23-S28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001730
PeckCJParsaeiYJazayeriHE, Desai MM, Lopez J, Uribe FA, Steinbacher D.A national assessment of racial and ethnic disparities in cleft lip repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024;154(5):1058-1066. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011203
37.
LangSSMeierPMPadenWZ, Storm PB, Heuer GG, Bartlett SP, Taylor JA, Swanson JW, Meara JG, Proctor M.Spring-mediated cranioplasty versus endoscopic strip craniectomy for sagittal craniosynostosis. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2021;28(4):416-424. doi:https://doi.org/10.3171/2021.2.PEDS20983
38.
GroupIW. Prevalence at birth of cleft lip with or without cleft palate: Data from the International Perinatal Database of Typical Oral Clefts (IPDTOC). Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2011;48(1):66-81. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/09-217
39.
ScialliAR. The national birth defects prevention study: How to communicate data. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;19(3):170-176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2013.09.007
40.
AustinAADruschelCMTylerMC, Romitti PA, West II, Damiano PC, Robbins JM, Burnett W.Interdisciplinary craniofacial teams compared with individual providers: Is orofacial cleft care more comprehensive and do parents perceive better outcomes?Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(1):1-8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/08-250.1
41.
Asher-McDadeCBrattstromVDahlE, McWilliam J, Molsted K, Plint DA, Prahl-Andersen B, Semb G, Shaw WC, The RP.A six-center international study of treatment outcome in patients with clefts of the lip and palate: Part 4. Assessment of nasolabial appearance. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992;29(5):409-412. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_1992_029_0409_asciso_2.3.co_2.
42.
Long JrREHathawayRDaskalogiannakisJ, Mercado A, Russell K, Cohen M, Semb G, Shaw W.The Americleft study: An inter-center study of treatment outcomes for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate part 1. Principles and Study Design. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2011;48(3):239-243. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/09-180.1
43.
RautioJAndersenMBolundS, Hukki J, Vindenes H, Davenport P, Arctander K, Larson O, Bergren A, Abyholm F, 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. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/2000656X.2016.1254646
44.
MosseyPAModellB. Epidemiology of oral clefts 2012: An international perspective. Front Oral Biol. 2012;16:1-18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000337464
45.
ShlobinNABaticulonREOrtegaCA, Du L, Bonfield CM, Wray A, Forrest CR, Dwean MC.Global epidemiology of craniosynostosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg. 2022;164:413-423 e3. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2022.05.093
46.
PaulMAOpyrchalJKnakiewiczMJaremkowPBajtekJChrapustaA. Hemifacial microsomia review: Recent advancements in understanding the disease. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(8):2123-2127. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006616
47.
AlotaibiAS. Demographic and cultural differences in the acceptance and pursuit of cosmetic surgery: A systematic literature review. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021;9(3):e3501. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003501
48.
ShweikehFFouladDNunoMDrazinDAdamoMA. Differences in surgical outcomes for patients with craniosynostosis in the US: Impact of socioeconomic variables and race. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2016;17(1):27-33. doi:https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.4.PEDS14342
49.
KlintoKKarstenAMarcussonA, Paganini A, Rizell S, Cajander J, Brunnegard K, Hakelius M, Okhiria A, Peterson P, et al.Coverage, reporting degree and design of the Swedish quality registry for patients born with cleft lip and/or palate. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):528. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05389-x
50.
McCarthyJGWarrenSMBernsteinJ, Burnett W, Cunningham ML, Edmond JC, Figueroa AA, Kapp-Simon KA, Labow BI, Peterson-Falzone SJ, et al.Parameters of care for craniosynostosis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49(Suppl):1S-24S. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/11-138
51.
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. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/2000656X.2016.1254644
AponIRogers-VizenaCRKoudstaalMJ, Allori AC, Peterson P, Versnel SL, Ramirez JP.Barriers and facilitators to the international implementation of standardized outcome measures in clinical cleft practice. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022;59(1):5-13. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665621997668
54.
ShawWCBrattstromVMolstedKPrahl-AndersenBRobertsCTSembG. The Eurocleft study: Intercenter study of treatment outcome in patients with complete cleft lip and palate. Part 5: Discussion and conclusions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005;42(1):93-98. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/02-119.5.1
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.
