Khaled Salah Abdullateef, Mohamed A M Nagaty, Mohamed Fathy, Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi, Abeer Aboalazayem, Mohamed H Abouelfadl
{"title":"The Outcomes of Modified Millard Technique Versus Tennison-Randall Technique in Unilateral Cleft Lip Repair: A Comparative Trial.","authors":"Khaled Salah Abdullateef, Mohamed A M Nagaty, Mohamed Fathy, Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi, Abeer Aboalazayem, Mohamed H Abouelfadl","doi":"10.4103/ajps.ajps_99_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to use anthropometric measurements taken pre- and post-operation to evaluate quantitative assessment of modified Millard technique compared with Tennison-Randall technique in unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Prospective randomised controlled study recruited infants scheduled for UCL repair. Infants aged 2-6 months, either complete or incomplete deformity. A total of 68 patients were randomised in 1:1 ratio to undergo either modified Millard technique (Group I) or Tennison-Randall technique (Group II).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group I had significantly longer operative time than Group II (85.7 ± 7.4 vs. 68.7 ± 8.8 min, respectively; P < 0.001). Group I has less post-operative wound infection, wound dehiscence and wound scarring than Group II, but Group II has less post-operative lip notch. In Group I, greater increases in post-operative horizontal lip length and vertical lip height were observed, compared to Group II, without statistically significant difference. Group I showed a greater reduction in nasal width and total nasal width than Group II, without statistically significance. Group II had a greater increase in philtral height. However, only post-operative Cupid's-bow width was significantly different between two groups (P = 0.041).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall results demonstrate no significant differences between modified Millard technique and Tennison-Randall technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":72123,"journal":{"name":"African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPS","volume":"1 1","pages":"12-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10903732/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ajps.ajps_99_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to use anthropometric measurements taken pre- and post-operation to evaluate quantitative assessment of modified Millard technique compared with Tennison-Randall technique in unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair.
Materials and methods: Prospective randomised controlled study recruited infants scheduled for UCL repair. Infants aged 2-6 months, either complete or incomplete deformity. A total of 68 patients were randomised in 1:1 ratio to undergo either modified Millard technique (Group I) or Tennison-Randall technique (Group II).
Results: Group I had significantly longer operative time than Group II (85.7 ± 7.4 vs. 68.7 ± 8.8 min, respectively; P < 0.001). Group I has less post-operative wound infection, wound dehiscence and wound scarring than Group II, but Group II has less post-operative lip notch. In Group I, greater increases in post-operative horizontal lip length and vertical lip height were observed, compared to Group II, without statistically significant difference. Group I showed a greater reduction in nasal width and total nasal width than Group II, without statistically significance. Group II had a greater increase in philtral height. However, only post-operative Cupid's-bow width was significantly different between two groups (P = 0.041).
Conclusion: Overall results demonstrate no significant differences between modified Millard technique and Tennison-Randall technique.