S. Jeon , S.-H. Baek , J. Jang , A.K. Oh , J.H. Chung , S. Kim
{"title":"Re-evaluating fistula management in cleft palate: longitudinal changes and risk determinants after double-opposing Z-plasty","authors":"S. Jeon , S.-H. Baek , J. Jang , A.K. Oh , J.H. Chung , S. Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.ijom.2024.09.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Longitudinal follow-up data of 1557 patients with cleft palate (CP) was used to identify risk factors for palatal fistula (PF) formation after double-opposing Z-plasty (DOZ), performed by a single surgeon. Overall, 104 (6.7%) of the patients developed PF, all of which were identified within the first month following DOZ. The incidence of PF for clefts of Veau class 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0%, 6.5%, 4.4%, and 20.3%, respectively. The PFs were pinpoint-shaped in 38.5% of cases, slit-shaped in 40.4% (2–8 mm), and other (10–96 mm<sup>2</sup>) in 21.1% . Among patients with PF, 14 (13.5%) chose surgical repair; recurrence was observed in four patients, of whom two showed secondary healing. Among the 90 unrepaired cases, 68 (75.6%) showed symptom resolution, mostly within 1–3 years. Recovery varied by PF size category: 81.1% of pinpoint, 71.4% of slit-shaped, and 100% of other fistulas healed spontaneously over a median 9, 3, and 21.5 months, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified cleft width as the most significant predictor of PF development (odds ratio 1.25, <em>P</em> < 0.001), while the Veau classification was not a significant determinant. This study identified cleft width as a critical determinant of the risk of PF following DOZ. A conservative strategy that prioritizes symptomatology over PF size (for PFs <1 cm<sup>2</sup>) is worthy of consideration.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":14332,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery","volume":"54 3","pages":"Pages 225-232"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0901502724003734","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Longitudinal follow-up data of 1557 patients with cleft palate (CP) was used to identify risk factors for palatal fistula (PF) formation after double-opposing Z-plasty (DOZ), performed by a single surgeon. Overall, 104 (6.7%) of the patients developed PF, all of which were identified within the first month following DOZ. The incidence of PF for clefts of Veau class 1, 2, 3, and 4 was 0%, 6.5%, 4.4%, and 20.3%, respectively. The PFs were pinpoint-shaped in 38.5% of cases, slit-shaped in 40.4% (2–8 mm), and other (10–96 mm2) in 21.1% . Among patients with PF, 14 (13.5%) chose surgical repair; recurrence was observed in four patients, of whom two showed secondary healing. Among the 90 unrepaired cases, 68 (75.6%) showed symptom resolution, mostly within 1–3 years. Recovery varied by PF size category: 81.1% of pinpoint, 71.4% of slit-shaped, and 100% of other fistulas healed spontaneously over a median 9, 3, and 21.5 months, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified cleft width as the most significant predictor of PF development (odds ratio 1.25, P < 0.001), while the Veau classification was not a significant determinant. This study identified cleft width as a critical determinant of the risk of PF following DOZ. A conservative strategy that prioritizes symptomatology over PF size (for PFs <1 cm2) is worthy of consideration.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery is one of the leading journals in oral and maxillofacial surgery in the world. The Journal publishes papers of the highest scientific merit and widest possible scope on work in oral and maxillofacial surgery and supporting specialties.
The Journal is divided into sections, ensuring every aspect of oral and maxillofacial surgery is covered fully through a range of invited review articles, leading clinical and research articles, technical notes, abstracts, case reports and others. The sections include:
• Congenital and craniofacial deformities
• Orthognathic Surgery/Aesthetic facial surgery
• Trauma
• TMJ disorders
• Head and neck oncology
• Reconstructive surgery
• Implantology/Dentoalveolar surgery
• Clinical Pathology
• Oral Medicine
• Research and emerging technologies.