In this study, we tested the precision of landmark positioning for a set of landmarks that can be used for the edentulous cleft lip and palate maxilla of the infant, by analyzing intraobserver and interobserver repositioning and measuring on a series of 121 (unilateral and bilateral) study casts. To date, no data on interobserver and only minimal data on intraobserver reproducibility are available. We found intraobserver reproducibility acceptable with total measurement errors ranging from 0.51 to 1.54 mm. Interobserver reproducibility was only slightly less with total measurement errors ranging from 0.63 to 1.57 mm. Total measurement errors were found to be relatively high for some variables. Both the intra- and interobserver analyses show insight into expected precision of landmark positioning during placement of these points on casts. A learning effect for precise positioning has been demonstrated in both analyses. The points with the highest precision overall are Q and Q', followed by the linear measurements PL and P'L'. Quality of regular study casts (impressions) is an important factor, with room for improvement. Reproducible landmark positioning on the cleft lip and palate infant's maxilla, can only be a reality if the quality of the cast is optimal and the investigator is experienced. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility are in the same range, which justifies the comparison of results from different studies and relieves future investigators of the need to have all measurements within a study conducted by the same investigator. Aspects of the biologic meaning of landmarks are also discussed.

This study shows that reconstructive surgery following weight loss after bariatric surgery results in a significant improvement in overall quality of life. Reconstructive surgery should be incorporated in the multidisciplinary care programme following weight loss surgery in the morbidly obese patient.

No abstract

BackgroundNo consensus exists on the optimal treatment protocol for orofacial clefts or the optimal timing of cleft palate closure. This study investigated factors influencing speech outcomes after two-stage palate repair in adults with a non-syndromal complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP).MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with a UCLP who underwent two-stage palate closure and were treated at our tertiary cleft centre. Patients ≥17 years of age were invited for a final speech assessment. Their medical history was obtained from their medical files, and speech outcomes were assessed by a speech pathologist during the follow-up consultation.ResultsForty-eight patients were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 21 years (standard deviation, 3.4 years). Their mean age at the time of hard and soft palate closure was 3 years and 8.0 months, respectively. In 40% of the patients, a pharyngoplasty was performed. On a 5-point intelligibility scale, 84.4% received a score of 1 or 2; meaning that their speech was intelligible. We observed a significant correlation between intelligibility scores and the incidence of articulation errors (P<0.001). In total, 36% showed mild to moderate hypernasality during the speech assessment, and 11%–17% of the patients exhibited increased nasalance scores, assessed through nasometry.ConclusionsThe present study describes long-term speech outcomes after two-stage palatoplasty with hard palate closure at a mean age of 3 years old. We observed moderate long-term intelligibility scores, a relatively high incidence of persistent hypernasality, and a high pharyngoplasty incidence.

In this study, we tested the precision of landmark positioning for a set of landmarks that can be used for the edentulous cleft lip and palate maxilla of the infant, by analyzing intraobserver and interobserver repositioning and measuring on a series of 121 (unilateral and bilateral) study casts. To date, no data on interobserver and only minimal data on intraobserver reproducibility are available. We found intraobserver reproducibility acceptable with total measurement errors ranging from 0.51 to 1.54 mm. Interobserver reproducibility was only slightly less with total measurement errors ranging from 0.63 to 1.57 mm. Total measurement errors were found to be relatively high for some variables. Both the intra- and Interobserver analyses show insight into expected precision of landmark positioning during placement of these points on casts. A learning effect for precise positioning has been demonstrated in both analyses. The points with the highest precision overall are Q and Q’, followed by the linear measurements PL and P'L’. Quality of regular study casts (impressions) is an important factor, with room for improvement. Reproducible landmark positioning on the cleft lip and palate infant's maxilla, can only be a reality if the quality of the cast is optimal and the investigator is experienced. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility are in the same range, which justifies the comparison of results from different studies and relieves future investigators of the need to have all measurements within a study conducted by the same investigator. Aspects of the biologic meaning of landmarks are also discussed.