Unilateral cleft lip: evaluation and comparison of treatment outcome with two surgical techniques based on qualitative (subject/guardian and professional) assessment
Unilateral cleft lip: evaluation and comparison of treatment outcome with two surgical techniques based on qualitative (subject/guardian and professional) assessment
复制标题
DOI：
10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.3.141
复制
发表时间：
2019-06-01
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
Adeyemi, Michael O.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adetayo, Adekunle Moses;Adetayo, Modupe Olushola;Adeyemi, Michael O.
目的：单侧唇裂的治疗效果因修复技术的不同而有很大差异。本研究的目的是评估和比较手术修复单侧唇裂使用的Tennison-Randall或Millard技术的基础上（定性）的父主题和专业assessments.Materials和方法：这是一个前瞻性的治疗结果。2013年1月至2014年7月在拉各斯大学教学医院进行的随机对照研究。本研究共招募了56名符合入选标准的单侧唇裂患者进行初次手术。通过抽签将受试者随机分配到手术组A或B。A组采用Tennison Randall技术进行裂隙修复，而B组采用Millard旋转推进技术进行裂隙修复。手术结果进行了评估，使用定性评价的监护人/受试者和独立的评估者的基础上修改后的形式所描述的标准Christofides和colleages.Results：在本研究中招募的56名受试者，32名男性，男女比例为13：1。在Tennison Randall组中，15名监护人/受试者最担心的是残留嘴唇疤痕的下部，而在Millard组中，12名监护人/受试者最担心的是疤痕的上部。米勒德组中被判定为扁平的鼻子比坦尼森兰德尔组中的要多。评估员观察到一个显着的差距，在疤痕海侵的两个groups.Conclusion：基本上，有没有重大差异，在整体结果之间Millard旋转推进和Tennison-Randall修复。Millard和Tennison-Randall的技术都需要显著的改进，以分别改善嘴唇上部和下部的疤痕外观。
Objectives: The outcomes of the treatment of unilateral cleft lip can vary considerably due to variations in repair techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare treatment outcomes of surgical repair of unilateral cleft lip using either the Tennison-Randall or Millard technique based on (qualitative) parent subject and professional assessments.Materials and Methods: This was a prospective. randomized, controlled study conducted at Lagos University Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and July 2014. A total of 56 subjects with unilateral cleft lip presenting for primary surgery who satisfied the inclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Subjects were randomly allocated to surgical groups A or B through balloting. Group A underwent cleft repair with the Tennison Randall technique, while group B underwent cleft repair with the Millard rotation advancement technique. Surgical outcome was assessed using qualitative evaluation by the guardian/subject and independent assessors based on a modified form of the criteria described by Christofides and colleagues.Results: Of the 56 subjects enrolled in this study, 32 were male, with a male to female ratio of 13:1. Fifteen of the guardiansc'subjects in the Tennison Randall group were most bothered about the lower part of the residual lip scar, while 12 guardians/subjects in the in the Millard group were most bothered about the upper part of the scar. More noses were judged to be flattened in the Millard group than in the Tennison Randall group. Assessors observed a striking disparity in scar transgression of the philtral ridges between the two groups.Conclusion: Essentially, there were no major difference in the overall results between Millard rotation-advancement and Tennison-Randall repairs. Both Millard and Tennison-Randall's techniques require significant improvements to improve the appearance of the scar on the upper part and lower part of the lip, respectively.