Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: The authors present an outcomes analysis of mandibular distraction osteogenesis versus tongue-lip adhesion in the surgical treatment of Pierre Robin sequence. METHODS: A retrospective, 15-year, single-surgeon review was undertaken of all nonsyndromic neonates with Pierre Robin sequence treated with mandibular distraction osteogenesis (2004 to 2009; n = 24) or tongue-lip adhesion (1994 to 2004; n = 15). Outcomes included time of extubation, length of intensive care unit stay, incidence of tracheostomy, and surgical complications. Polysomnography data were collected 1 month and 1 year postoperatively. Sleep study data included changes in oxygen saturation and apnea-hypopnea index. RESULTS: There were no postprocedure tracheostomies in the mandibular distraction osteogenesis group and four tracheostomies in the tongue-lip adhesion group. The preoperative oxygen saturations were significantly lower in the mandibular distraction osteogenesis group compared with tongue-lip adhesion (76.5 percent versus 82 percent; p < 0.05). Preoperative apnea-hypopnea index was significantly higher in the mandibular distraction osteogenesis group compared with the tongue-lip adhesion group (47 versus 37.6; p < 0.05). Despite these preoperative differences, patients undergoing mandibular distraction osteogenesis demonstrated significantly higher oxygen saturation levels at 1 month (98.3 percent versus 87.5 percent; p < 0.05) and 1 year postoperatively (98.5 percent versus 89.2 percent; p < 0.05) and lower apnea-hypopnea index at 1 month (10.9 versus 21.6; p < 0.05) and 1 year postoperatively (2.5 versus 22.1; p < 0.05) compared with tongue-lip adhesion. Surgical complications were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In nonsyndromic patients with Pierre Robin sequence, mandibular distraction osteogenesis demonstrates superior outcome measures regarding oxygen saturation, apnea-hypopnea index, and incidence of tracheostomy compared with tongue-lip adhesion. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
Flores et al. (Tue,) studied this question.