BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Impaired velopharyngeal closure function is sometimes a complication of a standard Le Fort I maxillary advancement in cleft palate patients. The transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy has been suggested as an alternative technique that may avoid this problem. The aim of this pilot study was to examine the effects of the transpalatal approach on velopharyngeal function in a series of cleft palate patients. PATIENTS: Sixteen consecutive patients with a history of cleft palate exhibiting maxillary hypoplasia who underwent a transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy. METHODS: All patients had a simultaneous audio/video speech recording and nasopharyngoscopy examination prior to maxillary advancement, followed by a repeat of the same examinations at least 1 year post-operatively. Velopharyngeal function was measured in two ways: by direct observation using nasopharyngoscopy, and indirectly by means of perceptual assessment. Reliability studies of the two measures were performed with satisfactory results. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the pre- and post-operative data in either the perceptual speech assessment or nasopharyngoscopy examination. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that maxillary advancement by transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy does not adversely affect velopharyngeal closure function. Copyright 2002 European Association for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Impaired velopharyngeal closure function is sometimes a complication of a standard Le Fort I maxillary advancement in cleft palatepatients. The transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy has been suggested as an alternative technique that may avoid this problem. The aim of this pilot study was to examine the effects of the transpalatal approach on velopharyngeal function in a series of cleft palatepatients. PATIENTS: Sixteen consecutive patients with a history of cleft palate exhibiting maxillary hypoplasia who underwent a transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy. METHODS: All patients had a simultaneous audio/video speech recording and nasopharyngoscopy examination prior to maxillary advancement, followed by a repeat of the same examinations at least 1 year post-operatively. Velopharyngeal function was measured in two ways: by direct observation using nasopharyngoscopy, and indirectly by means of perceptual assessment. Reliability studies of the two measures were performed with satisfactory results. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the pre- and post-operative data in either the perceptual speech assessment or nasopharyngoscopy examination. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that maxillary advancement by transpalatal Le Fort I osteotomy does not adversely affect velopharyngeal closure function. Copyright 2002 European Association for Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.