Kurnik Nicole M, Weidler Erica M, Lien Kari M, Cordero Kelly N, Williams Jessica L, Temkit M'hamed, Beals Stephen P, Singh Davinder J, Sitzman Thomas J
Division of Plastic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.
Department of Clinical Research, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2020 Jul;57(7):860-871. doi: 10.1177/1055665620902883. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
Palate re-repair has been proposed as an effective treatment for velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) with a low risk of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the proportion of patients achieving normal speech resonance following palate re-repair for VPI, the proportion developing OSA, and the criteria for patient selection that are associated with increased effectiveness.
PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched from inception through April 2018 for English language articles evaluating palate re-repair for the treatment of VPI in patients with a repaired cleft palate. Inclusion criteria included reporting of hypernasality, nasal air emission, nasometry, additional VPI surgery, and/or OSA outcomes. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models. Risk of bias was assessed regarding criteria for patient selection, blinding of outcome assessors, and validity of speech assessment scale.
Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria. The incidence of achieving no consistent hypernasality follow palate re-repair was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 44%-75%). The incidence of additional surgery for persistent VPI symptoms was 21% (95% CI: 12%-33%). The incidence of OSA was 28% (95% CI: 13%-49%). Criteria for selecting patients to undergo re-repair varied, with anterior/sagittal position of palatal muscles (33%) and small velopharyngeal gap (22%) being the most common. No specific patient selection criteria led to superior speech outcomes ( = .6572).
Palate re-repair achieves normal speech resonance in many but not all patients with VPI. Further research is needed to identify the specific examination and imaging findings that predict successful correction of VPI with re-repair.
腭部再次修复已被提议作为治疗腭咽闭合不全(VPI)的有效方法,且发生阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)的风险较低。作者进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定腭部再次修复治疗VPI后实现正常语音共鸣的患者比例、发生OSA的比例以及与疗效增加相关的患者选择标准。
检索了PubMed、Embase和Scopus数据库,从建库至2018年4月,查找评估腭部再次修复治疗腭裂修复术后VPI患者的英文文章。纳入标准包括鼻音过重、鼻漏气、鼻音测量、额外的VPI手术和/或OSA结局的报告。使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。评估了患者选择标准、结局评估者的盲法以及语音评估量表的有效性方面的偏倚风险。
18项研究符合纳入标准。腭部再次修复后无持续性鼻音过重的发生率为61%(95%置信区间[CI]:44%-75%)。因持续性VPI症状进行额外手术的发生率为21%(95%CI:12%-33%)。OSA的发生率为28%(95%CI:13%-49%)。选择接受再次修复患者的标准各不相同,腭肌的前后/矢状位(33%)和腭咽间隙小(22%)是最常见的。没有特定的患者选择标准能带来更好的语音结局(P = 0.6572)。
腭部再次修复能使许多但并非所有VPI患者实现正常语音共鸣。需要进一步研究以确定能预测再次修复成功矫正VPI的具体检查和影像学表现。