Literature DB >> 31960709

NAM Therapy-Evidence-Based Results.

Elçin Esenlik1, Travis Gibson2, Serena Kassam3,4,5, Yuki Sato6, Judah Garfinkle7, Alvaro A Figueroa8, Fawzi AlQatami9, Christopher Runyan10, Michael Alperovich11, Michael S Golinko12, Catherine Lee13,14, Athina Chatzigianni15, Anastasios A Zafeiriadis15,16, Pedro Santiago17,18, Banafsheh Hosseinian19, Emine Uluğ Kaygısız20, Neslihan Üçüncü20, Belma Işık Aslan20, Fatma Deniz Uzuner20, Ayşe Gülşen21, Atılım Akkurt22, Seher Gündüz Arslan22, Mariana Sabás23, Maria Ana Muñoz-Mendoza24, Daisy Masis25, Lizbeth Holguin26, Aracely Granados27, Nancy Edith Rojas28, Beatrice Campo29, Kamile Keskin22, M Okan Akçam30, Kristen M Lowe31,32, Paolo G Morselli33, Lucia Pannuto33, Ignacio Nacho Yarza34, Ana Tejero Martinez35, Esra Yüksel Coşkun36, Sagit Nissan37.   

Abstract

Many orthodontists working on patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) have shown great enthusiasm for presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO) to improve surgical outcomes with minimal intervention. Even though every clinician aims to use the best treatment modality for their patients, PSIO effects can be confounded by surgical type and timing of the primary repair, as is discussed in many studies. In such cases, one should be cautious when evaluating the particular outcomes for patients with CLP since it is difficult to differentiate the sole effect of an individual surgical or orthodontic intervention. As with any treatment methodology, nasoalveolar molding (NAM) has both benefits and limitations. Commonly cited concerns with NAM, and PSIO in general, include increased cost, increased burden of care, and a negative impact on maxillary growth. However, NAM cannot be deemed as having apparent long-term negative or positive effects on skeletal or soft tissue facial growth, based on previous studies. A review of the literature suggests that NAM does not alter skeletal facial growth when compared with the samples that did not receive PSIO. Nevertheless, the published studies on NAM show evidence of benefits to the patient, caregivers, the surgeon, and society. These benefits include documented reduction in severity of the cleft deformity prior to surgery and as a consequence improved surgical outcomes, reduced burden of care on the care givers, reduction in the need for revision surgery, and consequent reduced overall cost of care to the patient and society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  facial growth; infant orthopedics; midfacial growth; nonsyndromic clefting

Year:  2020        PMID: 31960709     DOI: 10.1177/1055665619899752

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J        ISSN: 1055-6656


  6 in total

1.  Infant with Clefts Observation Outcomes Instrument (iCOO): A New Outcome for Infants and Young Children with Orofacial Clefts.

Authors:  Todd C Edwards; Carrie L Heike; Kathleen A Kapp-Simon; Salene M Jones; Brian G Leroux; Laura P Stueckle; Claudia Crilly Bellucci; Janine M Rosenberg; Meredith Albert; Cassandra L Aspinall; Donald L Patrick
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2021-09-13

2.  Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Knowledge and Awareness on Nasoalveolar Molding in Newborns with Cleft Lip and Palate.

Authors:  Kevser Kurt Demirsoy; Semi Çalış; Süleyman Kutalmış Büyük
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2022-03

3.  The Surgical Nasoalveolar Molding: A Rational Treatment for Unilateral Cleft Lip Nose Deformity and Literature Review.

Authors:  Percy Rossell-Perry
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2020-08-20

4.  Teleconsultation-mediated nasoalveolar molding therapy for babies with cleft lip/palate during the COVID-19 outbreak: Implementing change at pandemic speed.

Authors:  Rafael Denadai; Lun-Jou Lo
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 2.740

5.  Perception of quality of life by children and adolescents with cleft lip/palate after orthodontic and surgical treatment: gender and age analysis.

Authors:  Ana Ruiz-Guillén; Carlos Suso-Ribera; Martín Romero-Maroto; Carmen Gallardo; Cecilia Peñacoba
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.750

6.  Cleft Orthodontic Care in Europe: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Authors:  Inês Francisco; Gregory S Antonarakis; Francisco Caramelo; Maria Helena Fernandes; Francisco Vale
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-17
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.