Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Evaluating cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) surgical outcomes from short-term international surgical outreach in low- and middle-income countries is essential for high-quality care. OBJECTIVE: To quantify reported surgical outcomes and complications on CLP surgery performed during international outreach, as measured by speech results and complications, including wound dehiscence, hemorrhage, and fistula formation. METHOD: A systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE identified full-text English-language studies from 1985 to 2025 describing CLP repair in international outreach. Outcomes were extracted per-patient and per-procedure, including complication rates, speech findings, and patient-reported results. RESULTS: Of 450 studies screened, 34 met inclusion criteria (26,529 patients; 30,864 procedures). The mean follow-up was 14.2 months (range: 1 week-11 years). The pooled complication rate was 3.3% per-procedure (1,015/30,864) and 3.8% per-patient (1,015/26,529). Per-procedure complication rates were 2.1% (285/13,823) for lip and 3.8% (642/16,745) for palate repair. The most frequent overall complications were wound dehiscence (1.3%; 400/30,864), hemorrhage (0.4%; 129/30,864), and infection (0.3%; 102/30,864). Among cleft palate repairs, palatal fistula (1.6%; 271/16,745) and flap necrosis (0.5%; 77/16,745) were most common. Four studies described improved speech, social functioning, and satisfaction postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Short-term CLP surgical outreach demonstrates early complication rates comparable to high-resource settings, although limited follow-up likely underestimates true adverse events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdurrob et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: