J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018; 44(1): 3~11
Unilateral cleft lip repair: a comparison of treatment outcome with two surgical techniques using quantitative (anthropometry) assessment
Adekunle M. Adetayo1, Olutayo James2, Wasiu L. Adeyemo2, Mobolanle O. Ogunlewe2, Azeez Butali3
1Department of Surgery, Babcock University, Ilishan-Remo,
2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria,
3Department of Oral Pathology, Radiology, and Medicine, College of Dentistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Wasiu L. Adeyemo
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Akoka-Yaba, Lagos 101014, Nigeria
TEL: +234-8023115885
E-mail: lanreadeyemo@yahoo.com
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0257-7853
Received December 30, 2016; Revised April 6, 2017; Accepted May 7, 2017.; Published online February 28, 2018.
© Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. All rights reserved.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Objectives: The unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair technique has evolved extensively over the past century into its modern form and has been identified as an important determinant of treatment outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare treatment outcomes following repair of UCL using either the Tennison-Randall (triangular) technique or the Millard rotation-advancement technique.
Materials and Methods: This was a prospective randomized controlled study conducted at the Lagos University Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and July 2014. A total of 48 subjects with UCL presenting for primary surgery and who satisfied the inclusion criteria were recruited for the study. The subjects were randomly allocated into two surgical groups 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 quantitatively according to anthropometric measurements, using a method described by Cutting and Dayan (2003).
Results: Our 48 enrolled subjects were evenly divided into the two surgery groups (n=24 for both group A and group B). Twenty-seven subjects were male (56.3%) and 21 were female (43.8%), making a sex ratio of 1.3:1. The Millard group showed a greater increase in postoperative horizontal length and vertical lip height and a greater reduction in nasal width and total nasal width. Meanwhile, the Tennison-Randall group showed better reduction of Cupid’s-bow width and better philtral height.
Conclusion: We did not find any significant differences in the surgical outcomes from the two techniques. The expertise of the surgeon and individual patient preferences are the main factors to consider when selecting the technique for unilateral cleft repair.
Keywords: Cleft lip, Assessement, Anthropometry

Current Issue

28 February 2018
Vol. 44
No. 1 pp. 1~39

Indexed in