Browse > Article

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SURGICAL TECHNIQUE FOR THE CORRECTION OF THE CONGENITAL CLEFT PALATE IN MONGOLIA  

Gongorjav, Ayanga (Dept. of Maxillo-Facial surgery, Mongolian Maternal and Child Health Research Center)
Luvsandorj, Davaanyam (Health Science University of Mongolia, The School of Dentistry)
Nyanrag, Purevjav (Health Science University of Mongolia, The School of Dentistry)
Garidkhuu, Ariuntuul (Health Science University of Mongolia, The School of Dentistry)
Dondog, Agiimaa (Dept. of Maxillo-Facial surgery, Mongolian Maternal and Child Health Research Center)
Rentsen, Bayasgalan (Dept. of Maxillo-Facial surgery, Mongolian Maternal and Child Health Research Center)
Jang, Eun-Sik (Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University)
Kim, Seong-Gon (Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
Park, Young-Wook (Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, Gangneung-Wonju National University)
Publication Information
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery / v.31, no.5, 2009 , pp. 381-385 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective : The objective of this study was to compare the surgical techniques for the correction of congenital cleft palate. Techniques and approaches : Four-hundred-sixity patients operated between 1993 and 2008 were included in this study. The collected data were age, sex, operating time, admission days, and complications. The comparison between techniques were done by independent t-test. Results: The majority (86.9 %) of patients were received the operation later than 1.5 years old. The distribution of each surgical technique was 43.8 % by Bardach palatoplasty, 11.9 % by Furlow palatoplasty, 1.8 % by Veau palatoplasty, and 42.4 % by the new technique developed by us. Postoperative complication such as wound dehiscence, formation of oro-nasal fistulas in the soft and hard palates were shown in 23.0 % of Bardach technique, 44.2 % of Furlow technique, and 37.5 % of Veau technique. However, only 5.4 % of patients were shown complications in our technique (P<0.001). The operation time was recorded 70 minutes under new technique while the others were 110 minutes (P<0.001). The clinical treatment at hospital was required 7.4 days for our technique and 11.3-15.5 days for the other methods. Conclusion : The surgical treatment of congenital cleft palate in Mongolia was conducted later than proper timing for surgery. As the results were indicated, our new technique should be considered for the correction of cleft palate in old aged patients.
Keywords
Congenital cleft palate; Bardach technique; Furlow technique; Veau technique; Palatoplasty;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Parwaz MA, Sharma RK, Parashar A et al : Width of cleft palate and postoperative palatal fistula - do they correlate? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2008 (article in press)   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Ariuntuul G, Furukawa H, Uetani M et al : The prevalence of cleft lip and/or palate in Mongolia. J Jpn Cleft Palate Assoc 31: 267, 2006
3 Muzaffar AR, Byrd HS, Rohrich RJ et al : Incidence of cleft palate fistula: an institutional experience with twostage palatal repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 108 : 1515, 2001   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Denk MJ, Magee WP : Cleft palate closure in the neonate: preliminary report. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 33 : 57, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Guyuron B, Eriksson E, Persong JA : Plastic surgery. Vol 1. 2009, p517
6 Muzaffar AR, Byrd HS, Rohrich RJ et al : Incedence of cleft palate fistula;an institutional experience with two stage palatal repair. Plast Reconst Surg 108 : 1515, 2001   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Cohen SR, Kalinovski J, La Rossa D et al : Cleft palate fistulas: A multivariate statistical analysis of prevalence, etiology, and surgical management. Plast Reconstr Surg 87 : 1041, 1991   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
8 Emory RE, Clay RP, Bite U et al : Fistula formation and repair after palatal closure:an institutional perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg 99 : 1535, 1997   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Schultz RC : Management and timing of cleft palate fistula repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 78 : 739, 1986   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Morioka D, Yoshimoto S, Udagawa A, et al : Primary repair in adult patients with untreated cleft lip-cleft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 120 : 1981, 2007   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Khosla RK, Mabry K, Castiglione CL : Clinical outcomes of the Furlow Z-plasty for primary cleft palate repair. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 45 : 501, 2008   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Veau V : Division Palatine. Paris: Masson, p. 6, 51, 1931
13 Furlow LT : Cleft palate repair by double opposing Z-plasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 78 : 724, 1986   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Calzolari E, Pierini A, Astolfi G et al : Associated anomalies in multi-malforbed infants with cleft lip and palate: An epidemiologic study of nearly 6 million births in 23 EUROCAT registries. Am J Med Genet A 143 : 528, 2007   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
15 Bardach J : Unilateral cleft palate repair. In current therapy in Otolaryngolgy-Head and Neck surgery, Philadelphia, p1985, 1984
16 Archer WH : Oral and maxillofacial Surgery. Vol 2, 1975, p1849
17 Brophy TW : Surgical treatment of palatal defect. Dent Cosmos 43 : 317, 1901
18 Evans D, Renfrew C : The timing of primary cleft palate repair. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 8 : 153, 1974   DOI   PUBMED
19 Kirscher RE, Randall P, Wang P et al : Cleft palate repair at 3-7 months of age. Plast Reconstr Surg 105 : 2127, 2000   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Morris HL, Bardach J, Ardinger H et al : Multidisciplinary treatment results for patients with isolated cleft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 92 : 842, 1993   PUBMED
21 Kaplan I, Dreshner J, Gorobischer C et al : The simultaneous repair of cleft lip and palate in early infancy. Br J Plast Surg 27 : 134, 1974   DOI   ScienceOn