Evaluation of failed sphincter pharyngoplasties.

A review of 30 failed sphincter pharyngoplasties is presented. Failure may be caused by inappropriate surgical planning, inadequate surgical technique, or inappropriate patient selection. Problems with surgical planning and technique that lead to failure were low flap placement, flap dehiscence, and flaps not approximated in midline. Problems with patient selection that lead to failure were large velopharyngeal gap on videofluoroscopy, and residual speech (articulation) deficits. Careful pre- and postoperative evaluation has led to refinement of the surgical procedure and improved outcome. Success rate improved from 67.65% in the first 5 years to 86% in the last 5 years of this 15-year series.

Evaluation of the sphincter pharyngoplasty.

The results of the sphincter pharyngoplasty were evaluated in 139 patients with velopharyngeal incompetence (VPI) who demonstrated active velar elevation. All patients underwent perceptual speech evaluation and lateral phonation radiographic study; select patients underwent multiview videofluoroscopic, flexible nasendoscopic, and pressure-flow studies. All but one patient demonstrated improvement and 109/139 (78.42%) demonstrated resolution of VPI. Sixteen of thirty failed pharyngoplasties were revised. Revision was successful in 8/16 patients yielding an overall success rate of 117/139 (84.17%). Success rate was 67.65 percent for patients managed during the first 5 years and improved to 84.78 percent for patients managed during the last 5 years of this 15-year series. Analysis revealed that younger patients were treated more successfully than older patients, large velopharyngeal areas were treated as successfully as smaller ones, and circular closure patterns were treated more successfully than coronal patterns. The primary cause of failure was insertion of the flap below the point of attempted velopharyngeal contact.

A surgical system for the correction of bony chin deformity.

Because the chin, like the nose, occupies a prominent position in the face, it must also be assessed in planning any changes in the facial profile. For example, a large nose associated with a microgenia does not appear as large when the chin is augmented. A chin increased in the vertical dimension confers an excessively long appearance to the face. Finally, a microgenia is associated with the stereotype of a sluggish personality, and a large chin in women connotes a masculine personality. The authors provide guidelines for assessing these variables and including them in surgical plan.

The chin.

The aesthetic aspects of the chin necessitate its evaluation in the context of the nose, mouth, and, to a lesser extent, the neck. Functional consideration must be given to the dental occlusion and the perioral muscular sphincter, and planning should acknowledge the sociologic implications of a strong versus a weak chin. After thorough skeletal and soft-tissue examination, the appropriate type of surgical intervention can be selected. Among the various procedures, chin implant remains the most commonly used, but the osteotomy offers the greatest flexibility, reliability, and potential for significant modification of chin form.