» Articles » PMID: 18936356

The Effect of the Palatoplasty Method on the Frequency of Ear Tube Placement

Overview
Date 2008 Oct 22
PMID 18936356
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To determine whether the type of palate repair affects the frequency of subsequent ventilation tube placement.

Design: Combined retrospective and prospective cohort with more than 2 years clinical follow-up after palatoplasty.

Setting: Tertiary care children's hospital and clinic.

Patients: A total of 170 patients with cleft palate (with or without cleft lip) underwent palatoplasty between 1995 and 2003. Sixty-nine patients with less than 2 years of follow-up visits and 1 patient who did not require ear tubes were excluded from this analysis.

Interventions: Either traditional 2-flap palatoplasty (group A) or double-opposing Z-plasty (group B) was performed. The type of palatoplasty performed was based on the reconstructive surgeon's clinical decision. Ventilation tubes were placed for otitis media, conductive hearing loss, or eustachian tube dysfunction. Patients received routine follow-up care every 6 months or whenever acute problems arose. Data were analyzed with independent t tests, chi(2) tests, and Fisher exact tests.

Main Outcome Measures: Number of ear tubes placed after palatoplasty in each group.

Results: Group A had a mean (SE) of 2.9 (0.2) sets of tubes placed, while group B had a mean (SE) of 1.8 (0.2) sets of tubes. Group A had significantly more sets of ventilation tubes placed (P < .001) than group B. Subgroup analysis based on type of cleft was performed.

Conclusion: Children with cleft palate who underwent double-opposing Z-plasty had fewer sets of ear tubes placed postoperatively than patients who had traditional repair.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Eustachian tube ventilation function between cleft palate and normal patients using sonotubometry.

Widodo D, Hisyam A, Alviandi W, Mansyur M JPRAS Open. 2021; 29:32-40.

PMID: 34036142 PMC: 8138675. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2021.04.003.


Pre-operative and post-operative audiological assessment in cleft lip and palate patients-a prospective study.

Acharya P, Sahana B, Desai A, Jalisatgi R, Kumar N J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2021; 11(2):321-329.

PMID: 33786295 PMC: 7994542. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2021.03.003.


Otologic, audiometric and speech findings in patients undergoing surgery for cleft palate.

Garcia-Vaquero C, Mir C, Graterol D, Ortiz N, Rochera-Villach M, LLeonart M BMC Pediatr. 2018; 18(1):350.

PMID: 30409226 PMC: 6225714. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-018-1312-7.


Differences in the Tensor Veli Palatini Between Adults With and Without Cleft Palate Using High-Resolution 3-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

George T, Kotlarek K, Kuehn D, Sutton B, Perry J Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018; 55(5):697-705.

PMID: 29360409 PMC: 6506844. DOI: 10.1177/1055665617752802.


Resolution of Otitis Media With Effusion in Children With Cleft Palate Followed Through Five Years of Age.

Alper C, Losee J, Seroky J, Mandel E, Richert B, Doyle W Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016; 53(5):607-13.

PMID: 27533493 PMC: 5074527. DOI: 10.1597/15-130.