Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Speech results after one-stage palatoplasty with or without muscle reconstruction for isolated cleft palate.
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010 Jan; 47(1):92-103.CP

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate speech outcome between children with isolated cleft palate undergoing palatoplasty with and without muscle reconstruction and to compare speech outcomes between cleft and non cleft children. The number of subsequent velopharyngeal flaps was compared with respect to surgical techniques and cleft extent.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional retrospective study.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred four children aged 4 years, 0 months to 6 years, 0 months, 33 with isolated cleft of the soft palate, 53 with isolated cleft of the hard and soft palate, and 18 non cleft children.

INTERVENTIONS

Two primary palate repair techniques: minimal incision technique (MIT) and minimal incision technique including muscle reconstruction (MIT(mr)).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Perceptual judgment of seven speech parameters assessed on a five-point scale.

RESULTS

No significant differences in speech outcomes were found between MIT and MIT(mr) surgery groups. The number of velopharyngeal flaps was significantly lower after MIT(mr) surgery compared to MIT surgery. The number of flaps was also significantly lower in children with cleft of the soft palate compared to children with cleft of the hard and soft palate. Children with cleft of the soft palate had significantly less glottal articulation and weak pressure consonants compared to children with cleft of the hard and soft palate.

CONCLUSIONS

The MIT(mr) surgery technique was not significantly superior to the MIT technique regarding speech outcomes related to velopharyngeal competence, but had fewer velopharyngeal flaps, which is contradictory. Until a larger sample can be studied, we will continue to use MIT(mr) for primary palate repair.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Speech Pathology, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, Sweden.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

20078205

Citation

Nyberg, Jill, et al. "Speech Results After One-stage Palatoplasty With or Without Muscle Reconstruction for Isolated Cleft Palate." The Cleft Palate-craniofacial Journal : Official Publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, vol. 47, no. 1, 2010, pp. 92-103.
Nyberg J, Westberg LR, Neovius E, et al. Speech results after one-stage palatoplasty with or without muscle reconstruction for isolated cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(1):92-103.
Nyberg, J., Westberg, L. R., Neovius, E., Larson, O., & Henningsson, G. (2010). Speech results after one-stage palatoplasty with or without muscle reconstruction for isolated cleft palate. The Cleft Palate-craniofacial Journal : Official Publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, 47(1), 92-103. https://doi.org/10.1597/08-222.1
Nyberg J, et al. Speech Results After One-stage Palatoplasty With or Without Muscle Reconstruction for Isolated Cleft Palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010;47(1):92-103. PubMed PMID: 20078205.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Speech results after one-stage palatoplasty with or without muscle reconstruction for isolated cleft palate. AU - Nyberg,Jill, AU - Westberg,Liisi Raud, AU - Neovius,Erik, AU - Larson,Ola, AU - Henningsson,Gunilla, PY - 2010/1/19/entrez PY - 2010/1/19/pubmed PY - 2010/2/25/medline SP - 92 EP - 103 JF - The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association JO - Cleft Palate Craniofac J VL - 47 IS - 1 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To investigate speech outcome between children with isolated cleft palate undergoing palatoplasty with and without muscle reconstruction and to compare speech outcomes between cleft and non cleft children. The number of subsequent velopharyngeal flaps was compared with respect to surgical techniques and cleft extent. DESIGN: Cross-sectional retrospective study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred four children aged 4 years, 0 months to 6 years, 0 months, 33 with isolated cleft of the soft palate, 53 with isolated cleft of the hard and soft palate, and 18 non cleft children. INTERVENTIONS: Two primary palate repair techniques: minimal incision technique (MIT) and minimal incision technique including muscle reconstruction (MIT(mr)). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceptual judgment of seven speech parameters assessed on a five-point scale. RESULTS: No significant differences in speech outcomes were found between MIT and MIT(mr) surgery groups. The number of velopharyngeal flaps was significantly lower after MIT(mr) surgery compared to MIT surgery. The number of flaps was also significantly lower in children with cleft of the soft palate compared to children with cleft of the hard and soft palate. Children with cleft of the soft palate had significantly less glottal articulation and weak pressure consonants compared to children with cleft of the hard and soft palate. CONCLUSIONS: The MIT(mr) surgery technique was not significantly superior to the MIT technique regarding speech outcomes related to velopharyngeal competence, but had fewer velopharyngeal flaps, which is contradictory. Until a larger sample can be studied, we will continue to use MIT(mr) for primary palate repair. SN - 1545-1569 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/20078205/Speech_results_after_one_stage_palatoplasty_with_or_without_muscle_reconstruction_for_isolated_cleft_palate_ L2 - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1597/08-222.1?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -