Rahul Chhajlani1,2,3,4, Prakash Chhajlani5,6, Krishnamurthy Bonanthaya7, Ravi Kumar Mahajan8. 1. Dr. Chhajlani's Maxillofacial, Cleft and Facial Plastic Surgery Centre. 2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Index Institute of Dental Sciences, Malwanchal University, Indore. 3. Department of Maxillofacial and Cleft Surgery, Smile Train Centre, CHL Medical Centre, Ujjain. 4. Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Varma Union Hospital, CHL Group of Hospitals. 5. Dr Chhajlani's Cosmetic and Plastic Surgery Centre. 6. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Index Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Indore. 7. Department of Maxillofacial and Cleft Surgery, Smile Train Centre, Bhagwan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore. 8. Department of Plastic, Cosmetic, Reconstructive and Microvascular Surgery, Amandeep Hospital, Amritsar, India.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) and alveolar bone grafting (ABG) procedures have a vast history. There have been many publications regarding ABG and secondary ABG, with and without presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO), in bilateral cleft lip and palate patients. There is little long-term data available describing results of both techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: The interdisciplinary approach to primary and secondary surgical procedures has proven to be beneficial for patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate. In the neonates, naso-alveolar molding (NAM) has been found to optimize the aesthetic outcome as well as re-approximating the arches to facilitate GPP. During the mixed dentition stage, arch preparation/expansion before the secondary ABG procedure improves arch morphology, restores the functional interarch relationship, and facilitates surgery. SUMMARY: This review aims to highlight the key points of both the procedures and why combining both procedures along with PSIO procedures such as NAM might be helpful for the patients in the long term.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) and alveolar bone grafting (ABG) procedures have a vast history. There have been many publications regarding ABG and secondary ABG, with and without presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO), in bilateral cleft lip and palatepatients. There is little long-term data available describing results of both techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: The interdisciplinary approach to primary and secondary surgical procedures has proven to be beneficial for patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate. In the neonates, naso-alveolar molding (NAM) has been found to optimize the aesthetic outcome as well as re-approximating the arches to facilitate GPP. During the mixed dentition stage, arch preparation/expansion before the secondary ABG procedure improves arch morphology, restores the functional interarch relationship, and facilitates surgery. SUMMARY: This review aims to highlight the key points of both the procedures and why combining both procedures along with PSIO procedures such as NAM might be helpful for the patients in the long term.