Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates cleft palate repair techniques in 65 patients, suggesting customized approaches enhance outcomes.
No single soft palate repair technique is universally optimal for cleft palate reconstruction; the ideal approach depends on cleft gap width and palatal configuration. Wide-gap clefts incur excessive tension with double opposing Z-plasty, whereas narrow-gap clefts may not require the complexity of intravelar veloplasty (IVV). We developed an institutional protocol selecting the repair technique based on intraoperative cleft gap measurement at the uvular neck: modified asymmetric small limb Z-plasty (MASLZ) for V-shaped gaps ≤ 6 mm, and straight-line repair (SLR) with overlapping IVV for gaps wider or U-shaped palates. Both techniques maximize levator veli palatini muscle overlap, the physiological basis of velopharyngeal competence. In 65 patients with unilateral cleft palate treated by a single surgeon (2015-2023; 34 MASLZ, 31 SLR), fistula formation (1 vs. 5; p = 0.0951) and secondary velopharyngeal insufficiency surgery (2 vs. 6; p = 0.1377) were comparable, and surgical group was not an independent predictor of secondary VPI surgery in multivariable analysis. Consistent palatoplasty outcomes can be achieved through individualized, algorithm-driven technique selection rather than uniform application of a single method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: