xRead - Treatment of Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate (May 2025)

Outcomes Follow-up Level BFP Compared against 3weeks 4

3b

2-5 years 3b

3b

Evidence

(continued)

8.4 ± 0.46

(BFP), 8.6 ± 1.0

months

years

years

(Surgicel)

21-24

higher incidence of surgical fi stula closure in non-BFP (50%(n = 5) vs. 0%). No fl ap

non-palatoplasty groups ( P < .05). No differences in sagittal development

Higher incidence of fi stula in

In relaxing incisions (n = 22) Surgicel (n = 32) and non-palatoplasty group (n = 24) CBCT: Signi fi cantly wider

measurements on both cleft and non-cleft sides ( P < .05). Wider total transverse maxillary

In relaxing incisions (n = 21) Surgicel (n = 21) Fastest mucolization in BFP group (100% in BFP group In relaxing incisions (n = 47) Matched historic control group, not speci fi ed if other non-BFP group (10 vs. 14.3% in Surgicel group at POD21)

(21.28%) vs. 1 (2.13%), larger median size in

non-BFP (4 vs 2 mm),

necrosis, bleeding, infection, dehiscence in any group

Non-sedated MRI: Presence of BFP in all patients of the study group. Longest velar length, increased distance between posterior hard

palate and levator palatini, and larger effective

velopharyngeal ratio in BFP group.

dimensions compared with Surgicel group for transverse maxillary

dimensions compared with Surgicel and

between BFP and Surgicel group.

in relaxing incisions (n = 47)

No BFP used for palate repair (n = 5) and healthy

non-cleft controls (n = 5)

material was placed

As added layer in hard-soft palate junction (n = 5),

Intervention

unilateral in 4 cases

Furlow (n = 4)

unspeci fi ed

(n = 1) in BFP group,

non-BFP group Modi fi ed Furlow

Two- fl ap

Palate repair surgical

technique

Straight line repair

and intravelar veloplasty

palatoplasty, IVVP

techniques in

with small

Z-plasties

comparative study 78 UCLP, UCLP +

complete, 6

incomplete)

III, IV

with no perceptual signs of VPD,

non-cleft controls

Surgicel as positive control, UCL as

negative control group

42 Cleft palate (36

94 Cleft palate Veau II,

15 Repaired cleft palate

Study Study design n Inclusion criteria Khan, 2021 26 Prospective comparative study Thanapaisal, 2022 37 Cross-sectional prospective study

Kotlarek, 2022 15 Prospective comparative study

Lo, 2022 4 Outcome

Table 2. (continued)

7