An Intercenter Comparison of Nasolabial Appearance Including a Center Using Nasoalveolar Molding

Peanchitlertkajorn, Supakit; Mercado, Ana; Daskalogiannakis, John; Hathaway, Ronald; Russell, Kathy; Semb, Gunvor; Shaw, William C.; Lamichane, Manish; Cohen, Marilyn; Long, Ross E.

doi:10.1177/1055665618754947

Cited by 19 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 439 publications were identified, and 13 publications met criteria for inclusion in this review (Figure 1) (Barillas, 2009; Chang et al, 2010; Clark, 2011; Shetty, 2017; Akarsu-Guven, 2018; AlHayyan et al, 2018; Kornbluth, 2018; Massie, 2018; Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018a; Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018b; Singer, 2018; Funayama et al, 2019). The fully reproducible search strategy is included in the Online Appendix.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fully reproducible search strategy is included in the Online Appendix. The 2 publications by Peanchitlertkajorn et al (Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018a; Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018b) were retrospective analyses that included the same 4 centers: Centers B, C, and D of the original Americleft study (Long et al, 2011) and one additional center that offered NAM (center G). Although these publications assessed different outcomes, they were considered to represent a single patient sample.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meta-analyses for Asher-McDade parameters involved 3 multicenter studies by Peanchitlertkajorn et al (Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018a), Kornbluth et al (2018), and Singer et al (2018). The Peanchitlertkajorn study (Peanchitlertkajorn, 2018a) included 4 centers, which each provided a different treatment protocol involving NAM, non-NAM passive PSIO, no PSIO, or presurgical taping (excluded from this review). Patients underwent primary lip repair at 2 to 5 months of age and palate repair at around 12 months of age, although each center utilized slightly different techniques for these primary repairs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Long-Term Effects of Nasoalveolar Molding in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Padovano

Skolnick

Naidoo

et al. 2021

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate long-term treatment effects of nasoalveolar molding (NAM) in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Included manuscripts met the following criteria: (1) involved patients with UCLP who received NAM; (2) included comparison group(s) who either received non-NAM passive presurgical infant orthopedic appliances (PSIO) or who did not receive any PSIO; (3) reported at least one objective or validated measure of nasolabial, craniofacial, or palatal form; and (4) had patient follow-up beyond 4 years of age. Results: A total of 12 studies were included in this review. Meta-analyses were possible for Asher-McDade parameters and cephalometric measurements. Compared to patients who did not receive any PSIO, those who underwent NAM therapy were more likely to have good to excellent frontal nasal form (Risk ratio: 2.4, 95% CI: 1.24-3.68) and vermillion border (Risk ratio: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.19-2.71). However, there were no statistically significant differences in cephalometric measurements between these groups. Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences between patients receiving NAM versus non-NAM PSIO. There was insufficient evidence to determine the impact of NAM on dental arch development. Conclusions: The preponderance of evidence in this review suggests that NAM produces benefits in nasolabial aesthetic form when compared with no appliance-based presurgical treatment. However, there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether NAM produces such benefits when compared with other passive PSIOs.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-Term Effects of Nasoalveolar Molding in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Padovano

Skolnick

Naidoo

et al. 2021

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Changes in the alveolar gap width and transverse dental arch relationships have been described by different groups following primary cheiloplasty. 24 , 31 , 32 These authors reported that presurgical orthopedics had no lasting effect on arch form.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

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

Rossell-Perry

2020

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purposes of this study were to evaluate surgical outcomes after primary surgery to address unilateral cleft lip, nose, and palate deformities and to perform a review of the literature to evaluate the effects of nasoalveolar molding (NAM) plus primary surgical repair on nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Methods: A cohort study of 37 primary complete unilateral cleft lip nasal deformity repairs was performed by a single surgeon. The outcomes were anthropometric measurements of the repaired lip, nose, and alveolar cleft width at the age of 1 and 5 years. A review of the literature was performed for studies published until March 2020 to evaluate the effect of presurgical NAM on nasolabial aesthetics. Results: Statistically significant differences were observed between pre- and postoperative columellar angle and alveolar cleft width. A total of 308 studies were identified, and 8 were included in the final analysis of 684 patients. The overall study quality was low according to the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine, and GRADE level of evidence was low. Conclusions: Primary cheilorhinoplasty alone is a good approach to improve nose appearance and alveolar gap in patients with unilateral cleft lip nose and palate deformity. Definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of presurgical NAM cannot be drawn. Available scientific evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate that combined use of presurgical nasoalveolar molding and primary surgery provides better nasolabial aesthetic outcomes than does primary surgery alone.

show abstract

“…The Americleft study found no significant differences in nasolabial outcomes across four centres for both total and individual subscale component of the AM . However, a further study, which included three of the original centres plus an additional new centre, suggested that there may be an association with various treatment protocols …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Nasolabial outcomes in a nationwide study of orofacial cleft in New Zealand

Thompson

Stone

Williams

et al. 2019

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Structured Abstract Objectives To (a) assess nasolabial outcomes across four main cleft subgroups, (b) assess agreement using a categorical and a continuous scoring measure and (c) compare outcomes to international studies. Settings and Sample Population Analysis of 470 images of which 218 was unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), 128 unilateral cleft lip (UCL), 90 bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) and 34 bilateral cleft lip (BCL). Images were taken around five (n = 279) and eight‐ten (n = 191) years of age. Materials & Methods Cropped images were assessed using the Asher‐McDade (AM) and a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) by a panel of six raters. Scoring was undertaken for vermillion border and nasal form, symmetry and profile. Analysis was undertaken for each subscore, a total score with sensitivity analysis using a total score based on the subscores for each patient. AM intra‐ and inter‐rater reliability was assessed using weighted kappa and for the VAS components reliability was assessed using Pearson correlation. Results The AM intra‐rater reliability was moderate/substantial, whilst inter‐rater reliability was fair. The VAS intra‐rater correlations were high, and inter‐rater correlations were moderate. Better outcomes were found with cleft lip (CL) vs cleft lip and palate (CLP). No differences were found for sex, ethnicity, age and cleft laterality (unilateral). The AM found no difference between unilateral or bilateral. The VAS found bilateral scored worse than unilateral for both CL and CLP. Conclusions The nasolabial outcomes differ by cleft type. The correlation was relatively high for the VAS whilst the AM had relatively poor reliability.

show abstract

An Intercenter Comparison of Nasolabial Appearance Including a Center Using Nasoalveolar Molding

Cited by 19 publications

References 37 publications

Long-Term Effects of Nasoalveolar Molding in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Long-Term Effects of Nasoalveolar Molding in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

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

Nasolabial outcomes in a nationwide study of orofacial cleft in New Zealand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About