Arteaga V, Pannaci T, Hinostroza M, Brache G

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page:
PDF size: 526.39 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Despite the advances in reconstructive surgery, unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) represents a complex surgical challenge when greater than 10 mm. In low resource settings, distance, lack of multidisciplinary centers, low income and currently, the pandemic; limits patients to access to presurgical treatment. This study reports 2 cases of complete UCLP, similar in size by professional visual inspection, male, not associated with any syndromes. The purpose is to review two presurgical orthopedic techniques: Maxillary Functional Orthopedic Plate (MFO) -Nasal Molding (NM) and Nasal Retractor (NR) -Taping as a teledentistry alternative. The patient with the FMO-NM plate was treated in 2015, in person; the NR-Taping patient, in 2021, by telemedicine and a trained health promoter. The results of nasal and maxillary symmetry were measured with ImageJ software, through 4 linear measurements and one angular, based on the method described by Barillas and linear measurements made on the plaster models such as those proposed by Mazaheri. The techniques described for both patients were able to reduce the width of the cleft and mold the alar cartilage on the cleft side. The OFM-MN technique showed advantages in the development of the maxillary arch by guiding growth and development in the three planes of the space without collapse of the arch. The NR-Taping technique restricted the maxillary arch but is an alternative to remote treatment.

REFERENCES

1. Smith K, Henry B, Scott M. Presurgical Dentofacial Orthopedic Management of the Cleft Patient. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2016;28(2):169-176.

2. Vanegas C, Saenz W, González M, Perez D, Villagran E, Sánchez E et al. Análisis de la Situación de Salud Bucal en Guatemala. Guatemala: Comisión Nacional de Salud Bucal (CONASABU); 2018 p. 13-14.

3. Gibson, E., Pfeifauf, K., Skolnick, G., Kim, A., Naidoo, S., Snyder-Warwick, A., Huebener, D. and Patel, K. Presurgical Orthopedic Intervention Prior to Cleft Lip and Palate Repair: Nasoalveolar Molding Versus Passive Molding Appliance Therapy. J. Craniofacial. Surg. 2020; 32(2): 486-491.

4. Santiago, P., and Grayson, B. Role of the Craniofacial Orthodontist on the Craniofacial and Cleft Lip and Palate Team. Semin Orthod, 2009;15(4): 225-243.

5. Pannaci T, Arteaga V, Agell-Sogbe A, Kassam S, Scott M. Cleft Dental treatment, and Naso-Alveolar Molding. In: Swanson J, Low D, ed. by. Global cleft care in low-resource settings. 1st ed. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2021: 353-375

6. Hinostroza-Flores M, Perona-Miguel de Priego G, Loo-Valle J. Tratamiento ortopédico prequirúrgico con retractor nasal modificación Hinostroza en fisura labiopalatina unilateral completa: Reporte de caso. Rev Cient. Odontol. (Lima). 2021; 9 (2): e065DOI: 10.21142/2523-2754-0902-2021-

7. Barillas I, Dec W, Warren S, Cutting C, Grayson B. Nasoalveolar Molding Improves Long-Term Nasal Symmetry in Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip–Cleft Palate Patients. Plast. Reconstr. 2009;123(3):1002-1006.

8. Henry, C., Samson, T. and Mackay, D. Evidence-Based Medicine. Plast. Reconstr. 2014;133(5):1276-1288.

9. Vinson, L. The Effect of DynaCleft® on Cleft Width in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients. Int. J. Clin. Pediatr. Dent. 2017;41(6):42-445.

10. Mazaheri, M., Harding, R., Cooper, J., Meier, J. and Jones, T. Changes in arch form and dimensions of cleft patients. Am. J. Orthod. 1971;60(1):19-32.

11. Gamboam Criado Y. Antropometría general y craneofacial en neonatos. Bogotá DC Colombia: Universidad Nacional de Colombia Facultad de Odontología, Departamento de Salud Oral Posgrado Estomatología Pediátrica y Ortopedia Maxilar; 2016 p. 34. Disponible en: https://fdocuments.net/document/antropometra-general-y-craneofacial-en-neonatos-caso-bogot-2016-06-22-antropometra.html