Case report demonstrates effective cleft defect reduction in an infant using tele-assisted presurgical orthopedics, suggesting a viable remote approach for underserved regions.
Introduction and importance: Cleft lip and palate (CLP) defects are among the most common birth abnormalities worldwide. The standard of care requires a multidisciplinary approach, including presurgical infant orthopedics (PSIO) and surgical reconstruction. PSIO, which mandates frequent follow-up appointments, often faces significant barriers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) due to geographic distance and socioeconomic status, thereby impeding access to essential care. Case presentation: We present a 2-month-old boy with a complete unilateral CLP from a rural area, residing 500 km from the treatment center. We implemented a novel tele-assisted PSIO protocol utilizing a 3D-printed rhinoplasty appliance system (RAS) and sequential alveolar stenting (SAS) to bridge this gap. The RAS/SAS protocol reduced the need for in-person specialized visits to a single session, managing 500 km of geographic displacement through five structured remote consultations, supported by meticulous caregiver training on device adjustments. The PSIO was successful, achieving a reduction in nasal, labial, and palatal defects after 1 month, followed by an uncomplicated unilateral rhinocheiloplasty. Clinical discussion: While nasoalveolar molding is the gold standard, its reliance on weekly visits limits its feasibility in resource-constrained settings. This case suggests that the tele-assisted RAS and SAS protocol is a feasible and cost-effective technique. It maintains the high standards of comprehensive cleft care by transferring adjustment responsibilities to a trained caregiver, who is supervised remotely, thereby overcoming significant logistical challenges. Conclusion: The tele-assisted RAS and SAS protocol suggests a viable, safe, and effective solution for delivering high-quality PSIO care. This approach is crucial for improving access and equity for CLP patients in LMICs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Angulo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: