Objective: Velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) remains a known complication of primary palatoplasty. We sought to identify factors associated with the incidence of VPI and create a predictive model for VPI development in our population. Design: A single-institution, retrospective review. Setting: Multidisciplinary clinic in a tertiary academic institution. Patients: A total of 453 consecutive patients undergoing primary palatoplasty from 1999 to 2016 were reviewed. Inclusion required follow-up past age 5. Patients who were non-verbal, and thus unable to undergo speech evaluation, were excluded. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was VPI, defined as revision palatoplasty or recommendation by speech-language pathology. Results: Of 318 patients included, 179 (56%) were male. Median age at primary repair was 1.0 years (0.9-1.1) with a median age of 8.8 years at last follow-up. One hundred nineteen (37%) patients developed VPI at a median age of 5.0 years (3.8-6.5). Higher rates were seen with posterior fistula (65% vs 14%, P <.01) and straight-line repair (41% vs 9%, P <.01), with lower rates in patients with Veau I clefts (22% vs 39%, P <.05). Patients with VPI were older at last follow-up. Following multivariate regression, factors remaining significant were posterior fistula (odds ratio [OR]: 11.3, 95% CI: 6.1-22.0), primary Furlow repair (OR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.03-0.68), genetic diagnoses (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.1-7.9), and age at last follow-up (OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.01-1.2). Conclusions: Length of follow-up, posterior fistulae, and genetic diagnoses are associated with VPI formation. Furlow repair may protect against formation of VPI. Use of allograft, Veau class, birth type, birth weight, and race are not independently associated with VPI formation.

No abstract

Summary: Velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) is a complication following primary palatoplasty that can lead to hypernasality of the voice and other speech problems. The conversion Furlow palatoplasty for VPI can be performed with the addition of buccal flaps to provide additional tissue for palatal repair. In this study, the authors aimed to determine the effectiveness of buccal flaps with conversion Furlow palatoplasty in secondary management of VPI. A retrospective review of patients undergoing surgical repair of VPI between 2016 and 2020 was performed. Patients underwent either conversion Furlow palatoplasty alone (FA) or conversion Furlow palatoplasty with buccal flaps (FB) for VPI after primary straight-line repair of the palate. The authors reviewed medical records to collect demographics, operative information, and preoperative and postoperative speech scores. Of the 77 patients in the study, 16 (21%) had a revision that incorporated buccal flaps. The median age at cleft palate revision surgery was 8.97 years in the FA group and 7.96 years in the FB group (P = 0.337). In the FA group, four patients (7%) developed a postoperative fistula, compared with zero patients in the FB group. The average time to follow-up after revision surgery was 3.4 years (range, 7 months to 5.9 years). Both cohorts demonstrated a decrease in hypernasality and total parameter scores postoperatively. The use of buccal flaps in revision Furlow palatoplasty could decrease the risk for postoperative complications. The use of data from a larger patient population from multiple institutions is warranted to determine true significance. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

No abstract