Introduction: Although cleft lip and palate (CLP) is one of the most common congenital malformations, occurring in 1 in 700 live births, there is still no generally accepted treatment protocol. Numerous surgical techniques have been described for cleft palate repair; these techniques can be divided into one-stage (one operation) cleft palate repair and two-stage cleft palate closure. The aim of this study is to present our cleft palate team experience in using the two-stage cleft palate closure and the clinical outcomes in terms of oronasal fistula rate.
Material and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on medical records of 80 patients who underwent palate repair over a five-year period, from 2008 to 2012. All cleft palate patients were incorporated. Information on patient’s gender, cleft type, age at repair, one- or two-stage cleft palate repair were collected and analyzed.
Results: Fifty-three (66%) and twenty-seven (34%) patients underwent two-stage and one-stage repair, respectively. According to Veau classification, more than 60% of them were Veau III and IV, associating cleft lip to cleft palate. Fistula occurred in 34% of the two-stage repairs versus 7% of one-stage repairs, with an overall incidence of 24%.
Conclusions: Our study has shown that a two-stage cleft palate closure has a higher rate of fistula formation when compared with the one-stage repair. Two-stage repair is the protocol of choice in wide complete cleft lip and palate cases, while one-stage procedure is a good option for cleft palate alone, or some specific cleft lip and palate cases (narrow cleft palate, older age at surgery).