Yen Debra W, Nguyen Dennis C, Skolnick Gary B, Naidoo Sybill D, Patel Kamlesh B, Grames Lynn Marty, Woo Albert S
From the *Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine; and †The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Institute, St. Louis Children's Hospital, St. Louis, MO.
Ann Plast Surg. 2017 Mar;78(3):284-288. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000899.
Reconstruction of the levator musculature during cleft palate repair has been suggested to be important in long-term speech outcomes. In this study, we compare the need for postoperative speech therapy between 2 intravelar veloplasty techniques.
Chart review was performed for patients with nonsyndromic cleft palate who underwent either primary Kriens or overlapping intravelar veloplasty before 18 months of age. All subjects completed a follow-up visit at approximately 3 years of age. Data obtained included documentation of ongoing or recommended speech therapy at age 3 years and reasons for speech therapy, which were categorized as cleft-related and non-cleft-related by a speech-language pathologist.
One surgeon performed all Kriens procedures (n = 81), and the senior author performed all overlapping procedures (n = 25). Mean age at surgery (Kriens = 13.5 ± 1.4 months; overlapping = 13.1 ± 1.5 months; P = 0.188) and age at 3-year follow-up (Kriens = 3.0 ± 0.5 years; overlapping = 2.8 ± 0.5 years; P = 0.148) were equivalent in both groups. Cleft severity by Veau classification (P = 0.626), prepalatoplasty pure tone averages, (P = 0.237), pure tone averages at 3-year follow-up (P = 0.636), and incidence of prematurity (P = 0.190) were also similar between the 2 groups. At 3 years of age, significantly fewer overlapping intravelar veloplasty patients required cleft-related speech therapy (Kriens = 47%; overlapping = 20%; P = 0.015). The proportions of patients requiring non-cleft-related speech therapy were equivalent (P = 0.906).
At 3 years of age, patients who received overlapping intravelar veloplasty were significantly less likely to need cleft-related speech therapy compared with patients who received Kriens intravelar veloplasty. Cleft severity, hearing loss, and prematurity at birth did not appear to explain the difference found in need for speech therapy.
腭裂修复术中提肌重建对长期语音效果很重要。在本研究中,我们比较了两种腭帆内肌成形术术后言语治疗的需求。
对18个月龄前接受原发性克林斯或重叠式腭帆内肌成形术的非综合征性腭裂患者进行病历回顾。所有受试者在大约3岁时完成随访。获得的数据包括3岁时正在进行或建议进行言语治疗的记录以及言语治疗的原因,言语病理学家将其分为与腭裂相关和与腭裂无关两类。
一名外科医生完成了所有克林斯手术(n = 81),资深作者完成了所有重叠手术(n = 25)。两组的平均手术年龄(克林斯 = 13.5 ± 1.4个月;重叠 = 13.1 ± 1.5个月;P = 0.188)和3年随访时的年龄(克林斯 = 3.0 ± 0.5岁;重叠 = 2.8 ± 0.5岁;P = 0.148)相当。两组间根据韦氏分类法的腭裂严重程度(P = 0.626)、腭裂修复术前纯音平均值(P = 0.237)、3年随访时的纯音平均值(P = 0.636)以及早产发生率(P = 0.190)也相似。在3岁时,接受重叠式腭帆内肌成形术的患者中需要与腭裂相关言语治疗的人数明显较少(克林斯 = 47%;重叠 = 20%;P = 0.015)。需要与腭裂无关言语治疗的患者比例相当(P = 0.906)。
在3岁时,与接受克林斯腭帆内肌成形术的患者相比,接受重叠式腭帆内肌成形术的患者需要与腭裂相关言语治疗的可能性明显更低。腭裂严重程度、听力损失和出生时的早产情况似乎无法解释在言语治疗需求上发现的差异。