Faculty Bibliography

Background/Purpose: Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) ankylosis is an uncommon but debilitating condition which can affect feeding, speech, dental health, facial growth, and quality of life. We present an institutional experience treating congenital and acquired TMJ ankylosis, detailing outcomes and potential risk factors of recurrence. Methods/Description: Patients with ankylosis of the TMJ were identified through retrospective chart review (1976-2019). Clinical records, operative reports, and imaging studies were reviewed for demographics, surgical operations, and ankylosis including mean interincisal opening (MIO) and reankylosis.
Result(s): Forty-four TMJs with bony ankylosis were identified in 28 patients, 27(96.4%) of whom had syndromes. Mean age at any initial mandibular surgery was 3.7+/-3.6 (range: 0-14 years). Follow-up was 13.7 +/- 5.9 years. Sixteen (57.1%) patients had bilateral ankylosis. Nine cases of ankylosis were congenital, 16 were iatrogenic (4.5 +/- 3.7 years from initial distraction osteogenesis or autologous mandibular reconstruction) referred from outside institutions in 6 cases, and 3 were postinfectious. Patients having their first mandibular operation at a younger age had more frequent reoperations for recurrent TMJ ankylosis, although this did not reach statistical significance. Improvement in MIO was 21.4 +/- 7.3 mm. Ankylosis recurred in 21(75%) cases, 11 of which were iatrogenic, requiring an average of 2 reoperations (range: 1-8). Five patients with congenital TMJ ankylosis required gastrostomy and remained at least partially dependent. Five patients had tracheostomy at the time of TMJ ankylosis surgery: 2 were eventually decannulated and 3 required repeat tracheostomy after ankylosis recurrence and remained tracheostomy-dependent.
Conclusion(s): Craniofacial anomalies, younger age at mandibular surgery, and number of operations portend to increased risk of TMJ ankylosis as well as tracheostomy and gastrostomy dependence. Despite initial improvement in postoperative MIO, pediatric TMJ ankylosis is associated with high recurrence and multiple reoperations

Background/Purpose: We present the first long-term outcomes analysis of the nasoalveolar molding (NAM) treatment protocol on patients with a cleft followed from birth to facial maturity. Methods/Description: Single-institution retrospective review of all patients with a cleft who underwent NAM between the years 1990 and 2000. All study patients completed cleft care treatment at the same institution and were followed by the same team members. Our institution's treatment protocol offers NAM to patients with a significant cleft nasal deformity and/or widely displaced alveolar segments. All patients underwent primary cleft lip and nasal repair prior to the age of 6 months. Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) is performed, when possible, at the time of lip repair. Cleft palate repair is performed by 1 year of age. Collected data include surgical and orthodontic outcomes of cleft care such as cleft lip and palate repair, GPP, alveolar bone grafting (ABG), speech surgery for velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), palatal fistula repairs, orthognathic surgery, and revision surgery to the nose and/or lip.
Result(s): A total of 135 patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean length of follow-up was 18.8 years. Eighty-nine patients presented with a unilateral cleft (UNI) and 46 with a bilateral cleft (BI); 84% (113/135) of patients underwent GPP (UNI: 78% [69/89]; BI: 96% [44/46]), 43% (58/135) of patients underwent ABG (UNI: 40% [36/89]; BI: 48% [22/46]), 18% (24/135) of patients underwent speech surgery for VPI (UNI: 14% [12/89]; BI: 26% [12/46]), 3% (4/135) of patients underwent palatal fistula repair (UNI: 0% [0/89]; BI: 9% [4/46]), 31% (42/135) underwent orthognathic surgery (UNI: 22% [20/89]; BI: 48% [22/46]), and 11% (15/135) underwent revision surgery to lip, nose, or both prior to facial maturity (UNI: 9% [8/89]; BI: 15% [7/46]]. Of the patients who underwent GPP, 61% (69/113) did not require ABG (UNI: 65% [45/69]; BI: 55% [24/44]) and 42% (48/113) required neither ABG nor orthognathic surgery (UNI: 51% [35/69]; BI: 30% [13/44]).
Conclusion(s): Clinical outcomes of the NAM treatment protocol from birth to facial maturity demonstrate a low rate of revision surgery to the lip and nose, as well as a low fistula and VPI rate. The frequency of orthognathic surgery reported in this study is consistent with published data. In addition, 42% of patients who underwent NAM with GPP required neither ABG nor orthognathic surgery

Background/Purpose: Our study quantifies changes in skeletal, soft tissue profile, and globe position in patients with syndromic craniosynostosis after Le Fort I + III (LF I + III) surgery. Methods/Description: Patients with syndromic craniosynostosis who underwent LF I + III at the time of facial maturity were followed for at least 1 year. Each lateral cephalometric radiograph was traced using Dolphin Imaging software and superimposed at the sella. Changes in positions of the different landmarks at T0 (preoperatively), T1 (immediate postoperatively), and T2 (1 year postoperatively) were measured by the software. Sixty-seven soft tissue and skeletal landmarks were digitized and measured. LF III skeletal changes were measured by changes in lateral orbit and orbitale. LF I skeletal changes were measured at the A point and U1. Corresponding soft tissue profile and globe position were studied. All data were measured along the x-axis.
Result(s): Twelve patients included in our study have the following syndromes: Crouzon (n = 6), Pfeiffer (n = 2), Apert (n = 1), Antley-Bixler (n = 1), cleidocranial dysplasia (n = 1) and frontonaso dysplasia (n = 1). Nine patients had previous history of LF III distraction. Standard descriptive statistics was used. Data were analyzed using paired T test. Lateral orbit advanced 5.49 mm (T0-T1) on average, with a P value of 1.3-5, and 5.94 mm (T0-T2) on average; 0.45 mm (T1-T2) change with a P value of .96 suggests the lateral orbit is stable. Similar advancement at orbitale is observed at 5.68 mm (T0-T1) and 6.42 mm (T0-T2). The globe moved anteriorly by 1.98 mm (T0-T1) with a P value of .025 and anteriorly by 0.944mm(T0-T2). The change between T2 and T1 is 1.04 mm (P value: .26), which suggests the globe moved backward after postsurgical swelling subsided. The ratios of movement (globe to lateral orbit) between T0-T1 and T0-T2 are 31% and 16%, respectively. The decrease in ratio can be attributed to the reduction in soft tissue swelling at T2. Restoring position of the globe relative to the lateral orbit decreases the risk of exposure keratitis, keratoconjunctivitis sicca, and corneal ulceration. Anterior nasal spine and point A were advanced by 9.38 and 10.08 mm, respectively, between T0 and T1, and 9.01 mm and 8.51 mm, respectively, between T1 and T2. At the occlusal level, U1 advanced 10 mm and L1 moved back 1.45 mm between T0 and T1. Menton moved back 1.25 mm (T0-T1) but advanced by 2.48 mm (T0-T2). This change in direction is due to splint use at T1 as it rotates mandible clockwise.
Conclusion(s): In our cohort, LFI + III surgery improved both midface deficiency and proptosis in those with syndromic craniosynostosis.Combined Le Fort I + III surgery allows surgeons to perform differential corrections of the midface at the orbital and the dentition level. This is ideal for proptosis correction and establishing optimal jaw relationship

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:LeFort III distraction osteogenesis may be indicated in the treatment of syndromic craniosynostosis with severe midface retrusion. This study investigates long-term changes in patients undergoing distraction as children, and compares outcomes to an unaffected, untreated control. METHODS:Fifteen patients (9 males, 6 females) with syndromic craniosynostosis treated by LeFort III distraction at an average age of 4.9 ± 1.5 years were identified. Lateral cephalograms at predistraction, immediate, 1-, 5-, and 10-year postdistraction were superimposed using the best-fit of cranial base details. An untreated, unaffected matched control was obtained from the American Association of Orthodontists Foundation Legacy Collection. Differences in landmark location and cephalometric relationships were assessed between time points and between treatment and control groups. RESULTS:LeFort III distraction produced an average advancement of 14.86 ± 5.14 mm at A-point and 10.54 ± 3.78 mm at orbitale. This advancement produced overcorrection of anteroposterior occlusal relationships and phenotypic correction of midface position. Surgical stability over a 10-year follow-up was excellent. Posttreatment growth was characterized by absent anteroposterior maxillary growth, preservation of dentoalveolar development and maxillary remodeling, and delayed mandibular growth. Subsequent growth resulted in a long-term phenotypic relapse of pretreatment Class III maxillomandibular relationship and negative overjet. CONCLUSIONS:LeFort III distraction osteogenesis produces stable advancement of the midface. Overcorrection is required for long-term phenotypic stability because of deficient postdistraction sagittal midface growth. Late mandibular growth contributes to underestimation of the amount of distraction required to produce long-term phenotypic correction.

Treatment of cleft lip and palate ordinarily requires multiple interventions spanning the time of birth to adulthood. Restriction of facial growth, a common occurrence in affected children, is due to multiple factors. There are multiple surgical and therapeutic options, which may have influence on facial growth in these patients. As restriction to facial development can have significant implications to form, function, and psychological well-being, practitioners should have an appreciation for the effects of the different cleft therapies to facial growth. We have outlined and thoroughly reviewed in chronological order all of the interventions from birth to adulthood necessary in the comprehensive care of the patient with cleft lip and palate, along with the effects they may or may not have on facial growth.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To highlight the challenges and lessons learned in tooth-bearing maxillomandibular facial allotransplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:Two patients with ballistic composite facial injury underwent tooth-bearing maxillomandibular facial transplantation (FT) after informed consent and institutional review board approval. Patient 1 had undergone total face, double jaw, teeth, and tongue transplantation in March 2012. Patient 2 had undergone partial face, double jaw, and teeth transplantation in January 2018. Le Fort III and bilateral sagittal split skeletal osteotomies were performed in both transplants. Computerized surgical planning was used in both cases, and the allografts were transferred in intermaxillary fixation (IMF) with prefabricated dental splints before rigid skeletal fixation. RESULTS:Normal class I occlusion was achieved at the conclusion of each surgery. Patient 1 had developed a 2 × 2-mm palatal fistula in the early postoperative period and had also gradually developed class III malocclusion. Orthodontic treatment was started at 5 months after transplantation but failed. A Le Fort III advancement was performed 1 month later with successful restoration of class I occlusion. The palatal fistula was successfully repaired at 9 postoperative months. Patient 2 developed a postoperative palate and floor of mouth dehiscence, requiring palatal repair and hyoid and genioglossus advancement on postoperative day (POD) 11. Orthodontic treatment was initiated for Class II malocclusion. On POD 108, left mandibular nonunion was diagnosed. Left coronoidectomy, open reduction, and internal fixation were performed. IMF was maintained for 2 weeks. Orthodontic treatment was then resumed, with normalization of the occlusion by 10 months after FT. CONCLUSIONS:Maxillomandibular transplantation is a viable reconstructive solution for composite midface defects not amenable to autologous reconstruction. Improvement of functional outcomes and prevention of major complications rely on close attention to occlusal relationships, temporomandibular joint dynamics, dental health, and the intraoral donor-recipient soft tissue interface.

This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the impact of a nasoalveolar molding (NAM) protocol on midface growth in school-aged children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Data from 56 consecutively treated, NAM-prepared, Caucasian patients with non-syndromic UCLP from a single US cleft palate center were compared to pooled center data based on 56 patients with non-syndromic UCLP treated at 2 Eurocleft centers that did not use presurgical infant orthopedics (non-PSIO). Lateral cephalograms were obtained and 28 landmarks were identified. Published cephalometric measurements from Eurocleft centers were used for comparison. Seven cephalometric measurements (SNA, SNB, ANB, A'N'B', G'-Sn'-Pg', Sn-CT-LS, ANS-Me/N-Me%), available or derivable for both centers, were analyzed. Means and standard deviations for the 7 measurements were calculated for the NAM center. Student's t-tests were used to compare group means for 6 of the measures and a test of proportion was used for ANS-Me/N-Me%. No significant differences were found between the NAM protocol-prepared group and the Eurocleft non-PSIO centers on any of the 7 analyzed cephalometric relationships after accounting for false discovery rate. The NAM treatment protocol does not appear to impact skeletal or soft tissue facial growth in school-aged children with non-syndromic UCLP.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Assess the weight and contribution of each of the parameters of the Asher-McDade Scale to overall subjective assessment of nasolabial aesthetics following cleft lip repair. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective cohort evaluation. SETTING/UNASSIGNED:Cleft and craniofacial center. PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:Forty-one patients who underwent unilateral cleft lip repair. INTERVENTIONS/UNASSIGNED:Unilateral cleft lip repair. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/UNASSIGNED:Nasolabial rating using the Asher-McDade scale and overall subjective assessment of nasolabial aesthetics using a rank score following unilateral cleft lip repair. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= .69; P < .001). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:The parameters evaluated in the Asher-McDade scale have different weights and contribute differently to overall subjective assessment of nasolabial aesthetic outcomes following cleft lip repair. Adjusting for their weights results in a modified score that demonstrates superior correlation with overall subjective assessment of nasolabial aesthetic outcomes.

Background/Purpose: Knowledge of cleft lip (CL) surgical markings is essential prior to performing the repair. Work hours restrictions, increased patient care documentation time, and requests by patients not to have trainees involved in their care are limiting the acquisition of this skill in the operating room. Textbooks provide 2-dimensional illustrations of CL markings; while the cost of 3-dimensional (3D) printed CL models prohibit their widespread utilization for this purpose. We propose 3D stone models as simple and affordable tools to teach surgical trainees unilateral CL markings. Methods/Description: Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression material was used to create a negative of a patient with unilateral CL. Snapstone mixed with water was poured into the PVS impression to create unilateral CL stone models. Eleven plastic surgery residents were prospectively recruited in the study. They were provided with a textbook chapter and online module detailing surgical markings for unilateral CL repair, and were given 15 minutes of study time, before providing them with a unilateral CL stone model for performing the CL markings within 10 minutes. The participants were then provided with a standardized patient photograph for the same purpose. Learner satisfaction with the stone model and patient photograph as educational tools for learning surgical markings were evaluated using a modified survey based on the Student Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) survey, a validated tool for measuring higher education student satisfaction. Learner satisfactions with each tool were compared using a Mann-Whitney U test.
Result(s): The total production time of one stone model, including the PVS impression, was 10 minutes. The cost of one PVS impression and one stone model were 64 and 83 cents respectively, for a total of $1.47. Participants reported that when compared to the standardized patient photograph, the stone model was more stimulating (4.72 +/- 0.47 vs 3.82+/-0.87; U = 25.5; P = .01), increased their interest in the subject (4.63 +/- 0.50 vs 3.45 +/- 1.29; U = 26.5; P = .02), allowed better learning of the subject matter (4.54 +/- 0.52 vs 2.91 +/- 0.83; U = 5.0; P < .001), had greater clarity (4.64 +/- 0.50 vs 3.00 +/- 0.89; U = 6.0; P < .001), and was a more effective means of teaching CL markings (4.73 +/- 0.47 vs 2.91 +/- 1.04; U = 6.0; P < .001). Participants were also more likely to recommend the stone model (4.82+/-0.40) over the standardized patient photograph (3.00 +/- 1.10; U = 5.0; P < .001).
Conclusion(s): 3D stone models of the unilateral cleft lip deformity are affordable and simple to produce. Plastic surgery residents report that these models are superior training tools to learn cleft lip markings compared to patient photographs. These educational tools have the potential to overcome significant financial, logistic, and time constraints in teaching cleft lip surgery markings