Comparison of a third surgical protocol for the treatment of unilateral cleft lip and palate: a multidisciplinary systematic review and meta-analysis.

V L van Roey, S L Versnel, A Heliövaara, S Alaluusua, S T H Tjoa, E B Wolvius, A B Mink van der Molen, I M J Mathijssen
{"title":"Comparison of a third surgical protocol for the treatment of unilateral cleft lip and palate: a multidisciplinary systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"V L van Roey, S L Versnel, A Heliövaara, S Alaluusua, S T H Tjoa, E B Wolvius, A B Mink van der Molen, I M J Mathijssen","doi":"10.1016/j.ijom.2025.04.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review and meta-analysis builds upon our previous publication on the outcomes of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) treated with Oslo protocols (OP; vomerplasty during lip closure vs delayed hard palate closure protocols (DHPCP), comparing the outcomes of these two protocols with those of one-stage palatoplasty protocols (OSPP). A systematic search of the Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was conducted until August 2024. In total, 162 articles (156 study groups) were reviewed, including 4040 UCLP patients following OSPP, 1632 following OP, and 791 following DHPCP. The results suggest that intrinsic maxillofacial growth disturbances are common in UCLP patients, regardless of the timing or type of palatal closure. The incidence of velopharyngeal insufficiency was significantly higher in OP (24%) when compared to DHPCP (9%), with OSPP showing an intermediate incidence (14%). However, these findings are of very low certainty due to evident non-reporting bias and limited data. In contrast, OP and OSPP showed lower oronasal fistula (ONF) rates (7% for OP, 10% for OSPP) compared to DHPCP (20%). Altogether, OSPP and OP are favoured over DHPCP due to the lower incidences of ONF, better overall speech outcomes, and fewer primary surgeries.</p>","PeriodicalId":94053,"journal":{"name":"International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-26","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":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2025.04.008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis builds upon our previous publication on the outcomes of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) treated with Oslo protocols (OP; vomerplasty during lip closure vs delayed hard palate closure protocols (DHPCP), comparing the outcomes of these two protocols with those of one-stage palatoplasty protocols (OSPP). A systematic search of the Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was conducted until August 2024. In total, 162 articles (156 study groups) were reviewed, including 4040 UCLP patients following OSPP, 1632 following OP, and 791 following DHPCP. The results suggest that intrinsic maxillofacial growth disturbances are common in UCLP patients, regardless of the timing or type of palatal closure. The incidence of velopharyngeal insufficiency was significantly higher in OP (24%) when compared to DHPCP (9%), with OSPP showing an intermediate incidence (14%). However, these findings are of very low certainty due to evident non-reporting bias and limited data. In contrast, OP and OSPP showed lower oronasal fistula (ONF) rates (7% for OP, 10% for OSPP) compared to DHPCP (20%). Altogether, OSPP and OP are favoured over DHPCP due to the lower incidences of ONF, better overall speech outcomes, and fewer primary surgeries.

第三种手术方案治疗单侧唇腭裂的比较:多学科系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本系统综述和荟萃分析建立在我们之前发表的关于单侧唇腭裂(UCLP)患者使用奥斯陆方案(OP;唇闭合期间的重磅成形术与延迟硬腭闭合方案(DHPCP),比较这两种方案与一期腭成形术方案(OSPP)的结果。到2024年8月,对Embase、MEDLINE/PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane和谷歌Scholar数据库进行了系统搜索。共纳入162篇文献(156个研究组),包括4040例接受OSPP治疗的UCLP患者、1632例接受OP治疗的患者和791例接受DHPCP治疗的患者。结果表明,无论腭瓣闭合的时间或类型如何,先天性颌面生长障碍在UCLP患者中都很常见。与DHPCP(9%)相比,OP的腭咽功能不全发生率(24%)显著高于DHPCP(9%),而OSPP的发生率为中等(14%)。然而,由于明显的非报告偏倚和有限的数据,这些发现的确定性非常低。相比之下,相比DHPCP (20%), OP和OSPP的口鼻瘘(ONF)发生率较低(OP为7%,OSPP为10%)。综上所述,由于ONF的发生率较低,总体语言预后较好,初次手术较少,OSPP和OP优于DHPCP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信