We have located links that may give you full text access.
Effect of maxillary distraction osteogenesis on velopharyngeal function: a pilot study.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine preoperative and postoperative changes of velopharyngeal function in cleft patients who underwent maxillary distraction osteogenesis using the Rigid External Distraction System.
STUDY DESIGN: Six cleft patients followed for a minimum of 12 months after maxillary distraction were examined. Plain and contrast lateral-cephalograms were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively, and speech evaluation was performed by the same authorized speech therapist at the same time points.
RESULTS: The mean distraction amount at the anterior nasal spine was 11.7 mm (range, 7.4 mm - 15.0 mm). Both the nasopharyngeal depth and velar length increased after maxillary distraction, but the need ratio (nasopharyngeal depth/velar length) also increased after distraction. Although scores for velopharyngeal closure dropped a few points after maxillary distraction, the rating for hypernasality remained unchanged in all patients but the patient whose distraction amount was 15.0 mm.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that maxillary distraction of less than 15 mm may not markedly affect velopharyngeal function in cleft patients.
STUDY DESIGN: Six cleft patients followed for a minimum of 12 months after maxillary distraction were examined. Plain and contrast lateral-cephalograms were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively, and speech evaluation was performed by the same authorized speech therapist at the same time points.
RESULTS: The mean distraction amount at the anterior nasal spine was 11.7 mm (range, 7.4 mm - 15.0 mm). Both the nasopharyngeal depth and velar length increased after maxillary distraction, but the need ratio (nasopharyngeal depth/velar length) also increased after distraction. Although scores for velopharyngeal closure dropped a few points after maxillary distraction, the rating for hypernasality remained unchanged in all patients but the patient whose distraction amount was 15.0 mm.
CONCLUSION: These results suggest that maxillary distraction of less than 15 mm may not markedly affect velopharyngeal function in cleft patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app