Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyEurope PMC

Surgery for Velopharyngeal Insufficiency Following Cleft Palate Repair: An Audit of Contemporary Practice and Proposed Schema of Techniques and Variations

Tse RW., Sie KC., Tollefson TT., Jackson OA., Kirshner R., Fisher DM.

Prospective Study, published in Cleft Palate Craniofac J (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Prospective Study
Journal
Cleft Palate Craniofac J (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
37441787
PMCID
PMC10787042
DOI
10.1177/10556656231181359
Citations
8

Abstract (original English)

Objective Surgical treatment of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) includes a wide array of procedures. The purpose of this study was to develop a classification for VPI procedures and to describe variations in how they are performed. Design/participants/setting/outcomes: We completed an in-depth review of the literature to develop a preliminary schema that encompassed existing VPI procedures. Forty-one cleft surgeons from twelve hospitals across the USA and Canada reviewed the schema and either confirmed that it encompassed all VPI procedures they performed or requested additions. Two surgeons then observed the conduct of the procedures by surgeons at each hospital. Standardized reports were completed with each visit to further explore the literature, refine the schema, and delineate the common and unique aspects of each surgeon's technique. Results Procedures were divided into three groups: palate-based surgery; pharynx-based surgery; and augmentation. Palate-based operations included straight line mucosal incision with intravelar veloplasty, double-opposing Z-plasty, and palate lengthening with buccal myomucosal flaps. Many surgeons blended maneuvers from these three techniques, so a more descriptive schema was developed classifying the maneuvers employed on the oral mucosa, nasal mucosa, and muscle. Pharynx-based surgery included pharyngeal flap and sphincter pharyngoplasty

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
Surgical FlapsHumansCleft PalateVelopharyngeal InsufficiencyCanadaUnited StatesPractice Patterns, Physicians'Plastic Surgery Procedures

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.