Patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) and maxillary retrognathia are usually treated with maxillary advancement (Le Fort I osteotomy). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of maxillary advancement on the velopharyngeal function (VPF) and symptoms of velopharyngeal incompetence in patients with CLP.
Design
Retrospective group study before and after treatment.
Participants
All patients who had undergone Le Fort I osteotomy due to maxillary retrognathia from 2007 to 2010 at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden (n = 13). Pre- and postoperatively standardized examinations were used. Blinded audio recordings were independently assessed by three experienced speech pathologists. Acoustical data (nasometry) and information on VPF (videoradiography and nasoendoscopy) were collected from the medical records. Two patients with additional malformations were considered outliers, and group data were based on a sample size of n = 11.
Main Outcome Measures
Perceptual and acoustic symptoms of velopharyngeal incompetence and overall assessment of VPF.
Results
No assessment method showed a significant deterioration of the VPF postoperatively. Individual data revealed that 6 of the 13 patients had no or only one symptom pre- and/or postoperatively. The two patients with additional malformations had most symptoms pre- and postoperatively and did not change. Three patients had an increased number of symptoms postoperatively by at least two symptoms. No associations between the outcome and possible prognostic factors were found.
Conclusions
Maxillary advancement did not have a significant impact on the VPF at the group level, but three individuals had a somewhat deteriorated VPF postoperatively.
BrunnegårdK., van DoomJ.Normative data on nasalance scores for Swedish as measured on the Nasometer: influence of dialect, gender, and age. Clin Linguist Phon.2009; 23: 58–69.
3.
CableB.B., CanadyJ.W., KarnellM.P., KarneilL.H., MalickD.N.Pharyngeal flap surgery: long-term outcomes at the University of Iowa. Plast Reconstr Surg.2004; 113: 475–478.
4.
ChanchareonsookN., SammanN., WhitehillT.L.The effect of craniomaxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status: a critical review. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2006; 43: 477–487.
5.
CheungL.K., ChuaH.D.A meta-analysis of cleft maxillary osteotomy and distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2006; 35: 14–24.
6.
ChuaH.D., WhitehillT.L., SammanN., CheungL.K.Maxillary distraction versus orthognathic surgery in cleft lip and palate patients: effects on speech and velopharyngeal function. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2010; 39: 633–640.
CollinsJ., CheungK., FarrokhyarF., StrumasN.Pharyngeal flap versus sphincter pharyngoplasy for the treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency: a meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg.2012; 65: 864–868.
9.
DalstonR.M., MarshJ.L., VigK.W., WitzelM.A., BumstedR.M.Minimal standards for reporting the results of surgery on patients with cleft lip, cleft palate, or both: a proposal. Cleft Palate J.1988; 25: 3–7.
10.
DalstonR.M., WarrenD.W., DalstonE.T.Use of nasometry as a diagnostic tool for identifying patients with velopharyngeal impairment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1991; 28: 184–189.
11.
DeLukeD.M., MarchandA., RoblesE.C., FoxP.Facial growth and the need for orthognathic surgery after cleft palate repair: literature review and report of 28 cases. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.1997; 55: 694–698.
12.
EpkerB.N., WolfordL.M.Middle-third facial osteotomies: their use in the correction of congenital dentofacial and craniofacial deformities. J Oral Surg.1976; 34: 324–342.
13.
FigueroaA.A., PolleyJ.W.Management of the severe cleft and syndromic midface hypoplasia. Orthod Craniofac Res.2007; 10: 167–179.
14.
Golding-KushnerK.J., ArgamasoR.V., CottonR.T.. Standardization for the reporting of nasopharyngoscopy and multiview videofluoroscopy: a report from an International Working Group. Cleft Palate J.1990; 27: 337–347.
15.
GoodP.M., MullikenJ.B., PadwaB.L.Frequency of Le Fort I osteotomy after repaired cleft lip and palate or cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2007; 44: 396–401.
16.
HaapanenM.L., KallandM., HeliövaaraA., HukkiJ., RantaR.Velopharyngeal function in cleft patients undergoing maxillary advancement. Folia Phoniatr Logop.1997; 49: 42–47.
17.
HagbergC., LarsonO., MileradJ.Incidence of cleft lip and palate and risks of additional malformations. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J.1997; 35: 40–45.
18.
HavstamC., LohmanderA., PerssonC., DotevallH., LithA., LiljaJ.Evaluation of VPI-assessment with videofluoroscopy and nasoendoscopy. Br J Plast Surg.2005; 58: 922–931.
19.
HenningssonG.E., IsbergA.M.Comparison between multiview videofluoroscopy and nasendoscopy of velopharyngeal movements. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1991; 28: 413–418.
20.
HenningssonG.E., IsbergA.M.Velopharyngeal movement patterns in patients alternating between oral and glottal articulation: a clinical and cineradiographical study. Cleft Palate J.1986; 23: 1–9.
21.
JanulewiczJ., CostelloB.J., BuckleyM.J., FordM.D., CloseJ., GassnerR.The effects of le Fort I osteotomies on velopharyngeal and speech functions in cleft patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2004; 62: 308–314.
22.
KummerA.W., StrifeJ.L., GrauW.H., CreagheadN.A., LeeL.The effects of Le Fort I osteotomy with maxillary movement on articulation, resonance, and velopharyngeal function. Cleft Palate J.1989; 26: 193–200.
23.
LaRossaD.The state of art in cleft palate surgery. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2000; 37: 225–228.
24.
LewinM.L., CroftC.B., ShprintzenR.J.Velopharyngeal insufficiency due to hypoplasia of the musculus uvulae and occult submucous cleft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg.1980; 65: 585–591.
25.
LiljaJ., MarsM., ElanderA., EnocsonL., HagbergC., WorrellE., BatraP., FriedeH.Analysis of dental arch relationships in Swedish unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects: 20-year longitudinal consecutive series treated with delayed hard palate closure. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2006; 43: 606–611.
26.
LimS M., PalethorpeN., RodgerS.Understanding the common interrater reliability measures. Int J Ther Rehab.2012; 19: 488–496.
LohmanderA., OlssonM.Methodology for perceptual assessment of speech in patients with cleft palate: a critical review of the literature. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2004; 41: 64–70.
29.
MaegawaJ., SellsR.K., DavidD.J.Speech changes after maxillary advancement in 40 cleft lip and palate patients. J Craniofac Surg.1998; 9: 177–184.
30.
McCombR.W., NussR.C., MullikenJ.B.Predictors of velopharyngeal insufficiency after Le Fort I maxillary advancement in patients with cleft palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2011; 69: 2226–2232.
31.
PereiraV.J.The Effect of Maxillary Advancement on Speech, Nasality and Velopharyngeal Function in Cleft Lip and Palate.London: University City London;2012. Thesis.
32.
PereiraV.J., SellD., TuomainenJ.The impact of maxillary osteotomy on speech outcomes in cleft lip and palate: an evidence-based approach to evaluating the literature. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2013; 50: 25–39.
RossR.B.Treatment variables affecting facial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J.1987; 24: 5–77.
35.
SaltajiH., MajorM.P., AlfakirH., Al-SalehM.A.Q., Flores-MirC.Maxillary advancement with conventional orthognathic surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate: is it a stable technique?J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2012; 70: 2859–2866.
SellD.Issues in perceptual speech analysis in cleft palate and related disorders: a review. Int J Lang Commun Disord.2005; 40: 103–121.
38.
ShawW.C., DahlE., Asher-McDadeC., BrattströmV., MarsM., McWilliamJ., MlstedK., PlintD.A., Prahl-AndersenB., RobertsC.. A six-center international study of treatment outcome in patients with clefts of the lip and palate: part 5. General discussion and conclusions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1992; 29: 413–418.
TernströmS.Soundswell Signal Workstation Manual.Stockholm: Saven Hitech;2000.
41.
TrindadeI.E., YamashitaR.P., SuguimotoR.M., MazzottiniR., TrindadeA.S.Jr. Effects of orthognathic surgery on speech and breathing of subjects with cleft lip and palate: acoustic and aerodynamic assessment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2003; 40: 54–64.
42.
WatzkeI., TurveyT.A., WarrenD.W., DalstonR.Alterations in velopharyngeal function after maxillary advancement in cleft palate patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg.1990; 48: 685–689.
YamashitaR.P., TrindadeI.E.Long-term effects of pharyngeal flaps on the upper airways of subjects with velopharyngeal insufficiency. Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2008; 45: 364–370.
45.
ZarconeJ.R., RodgersT.A., IwataB.A., RourkeD.A., DorseyM.F.Reliability analysis of the motivation assessment scale: a failure to replicate. Res Dev Dis.1991; 12: 349–360.
