Buccal Fat Pad in Primary and Secondary Cleft Palate Repair: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence supporting the use of buccal fat pad (BFP) in primary and secondary cleft palate repair and its short- and long- term clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review conducted by 2 independent reviewers following PRISMA guidelines. SETTING: NONE PARTICIPANTS: Articles were identified from three databases (Pubmed/Medline, Embase and Web of Science). Search terms included "cleft palate", "palatoplasty", "palate repair", "buccal fat pad". INTERVENTIONS: Use of BFP in primary and secondary cleft palatoplasty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were immediate postoperative complications, postoperative fistula, and maxillary growth. Secondary outcomes were palatal length, speech, and donor site morbidity. RESULTS: Ninety-one reports were retrieved after excluding duplicates. Twenty-three studies were included (13 case series and 10 comparative studies). Overall level of evidence was low. Randomized and non-randomized studies had a high risk of bias. In primary palatoplasty, BFP was more frequently used filling lateral relaxing incisions(57.4%), or in the hard-soft palate junction and covering mucosal defects(30.1%). In these patients, post operative fistula incidence was 2.8%. Two studies found wider transverse maxillary dimensions after BFP use. No higher incidence of bleeding, infection, dehiscence, or flap necrosis was reported. In secondary palatoplasty, no recurrent fistulas were reported for patients undergoing BFP for fistula repair. CONCLUSIONS: BFP appears to be associated with a favorable impact in fistula prevention and management, as well as in transverse maxillary growth. However, there is a high heterogeneity among studies, high risk of bias and overall low quality of evidence. More high-quality research with long-term follow-up is warranted.

Perioperative Outcomes of Secondary Frontal Orbital Advancement After Posterior Vault Distraction Osteogenesis.

BACKGROUND: Posterior cranial vault distraction osteogenesis (PVDO) has gained popularity as the initial intervention in patients with syndromic craniosynostosis. Patients may require secondary frontal orbital advancement (FOA) following PVDO, but little is known about the perioperative risks associated with this staged management. The purpose of this study is to compare the perioperative morbidity profile of secondary FOA (study) to that of primary FOA (control). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for patients with syndromic or complex craniosynostosis undergoing FOA between 2004 and 2017. Univariate and multivariate analysis of demographic and perioperative data were performed. RESULTS: Forty-three subjects met inclusion criteria, 17 in the study cohort and 26 in the control cohort. The 2 cohorts were similar with regards to diagnosis and suture involvement, as well as weight-adjusted estimated blood loss, blood transfusion volume, and length of hospital stay (P > 0.050). Secondary FOA procedures required longer operating time (231 ±â€Š58 versus 264 ±â€Š62 min, P = 0.031) and anesthesia time (341 ±â€Š60 versus 403 ±â€Š56 min, P = 0.002). The secondary FOA cohort had a significantly greater proportion of procedures with difficult wound closure (19% versus 59%, P = 0.008). Two subjects in the study cohort developed a wound dehiscence, compared with 1 subject in the control cohort (P = 0.552). Frontal orbital advancement as a secondary procedure after PVDO was a predictor variable in multivariate analysis for wound difficulties (odds ratio 8.6, P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: Syndromic and complex craniosynostosis may safely be managed with initial PVDO followed by FOA, with some increased wound closure difficulty.

A Standardized Perioperative Clinical Pathway for Uncomplicated Craniosynostosis Repair Is Associated With Reduced Hospital Resource Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Hospital resource overutilization can significantly disrupt patient treatment such as cancelling surgical patients due to a lack of intensive care unit (ICU) space. The authors describe a clinical pathway (CP) designed to reduce ICU length of stay (LOS) for nonsyndromic single-suture craniosynostosis (nsSSC) patients undergoing cranial vault reconstruction (CVR) in order to minimize surgical disruptions and improve patient outcomes. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team implemented a perioperative CP including scheduled laboratory testing to decrease ICU LOS. Hospital and ICU LOS, interventions, and perioperative morbidity-infection rate, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks, and unplanned return to the operating room (OR)-were compared using Mann-Whitney U, Fisher exact, and t tests. RESULTS: Fifty-one ICU admissions were managed with the standardized CP and compared to 49 admissions in the 12 months prior to pathway implementation. There was a significant reduction in ICU LOS (control: mean 1.84 ±â€Š0.93, median 1.89 ±â€Š0.94; CP: mean 1.15 ±â€Š0.34, median 1.03 ±â€Š0.34 days; P < 0.001 for both). There were similar rates of hypotension requiring intervention (CP: 2, control: 1; P = 0.999), postoperative transfusion (CP: 3, control: 0; P = 0.243), and artificial ventilation (CP: 1, control: 0; P = 0.999). Perioperative morbidity such as infection (CP: 1, control: 0; P = 0.999), return to the OR (CP: 1, control: 0; P = 0.999), and CSF leak (no leaks; P = 0.999) was also similar. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a standardized perioperative CP for nsSSC patients resulted in a significantly shorter ICU LOS without a measured change in perioperative morbidity. Pathways such as the one described that improve patient throughput and decrease resource utilization benefit craniofacial teams in conducting an efficient service while providing high-quality care.