Perceptual Speech Assessment after Maxillary Advancement Osteotomy in Patients with a Repaired Cleft Lip and Palate

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Background Maxillary hypoplasia refers to a deficiency in the growth of the maxilla commonly seen in patients with a repaired cleft palate. Those who develop maxillary hypoplasia can be offered a repositioning of the maxilla to a functional and esthetic position. Velopharyngeal dysfunction is one of the important problems affecting speech after maxillary advancement surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of maxillary advancement on repaired cleft palate patients without preoperative deterioration in speech compared with non-cleft palate patients.
/Methods Eighteen patients underwent Le Fort I osteotomy between 2005 and 2011. One patient was excluded due to preoperative deterioration in speech. Eight repaired cleft palate patients belonged to group A, and 9 non-cleft palate patients belonged to group B.
Speech assessments were performed preoperatively and postoperatively by using a speech screening protocol that consisted of a list of single words designed by Ok-Ran Jung. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine if there were significant differences between the preoperative and postoperative outcomes in each group A and B. And Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine if there were significant differences in the change of score between groups A and B.
/Results No patients had any noticeable change in speech production on perceptual assessment after maxillary advancement in our study. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between groups A and B.
/Conclusions Repaired cleft palate patients without preoperative velopharyngeal dysfunction would not have greater risk of deterioration of velopharyngeal function after maxillary advancement compared to non-cleft palate patients.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김석권, "구개열의 유형에 따른 발음 비교" 대한두개안면성형외과학회 9 (9): 72-76, 2008

2 Moll KL, "‘Objective’ Measures of Nasality" 35 : 371-374, 1964

3 Schendel SA, "Velopharyngeal anatomy and maxillary advancement" 7 : 116-124, 1979

4 O’Gara M, "The effects of maxillofacial surgery on speech and velopharyngeal function" 34 : 395-402, 2007

5 Chanchareonsook N, "The effect of cranio-maxillofacial osteotomies and distraction osteogenesis on speech and velopharyngeal status: a critical review" 43 : 477-487, 2006

6 Chanchareonsook N, "Speech outcome and velopharyngeal function in cleft palate: comparison of Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy and distraction osteogenesis: early results" 44 : 23-32, 2007

7 Kim JH, "Simple method of speech evaluation in the Korean patient with cleft palate" 26 : 858-865, 1999

8 Phillips JH, "Predictors of velopharyngeal insufficiency in cleft palate orthognathic surgery" 115 : 681-686, 2005

9 McComb RW, "Predictors of velopharyngeal insufficiency after Le Fort I maxillary advancement in patients with cleft palate" 69 : 2226-2232, 2011

10 Kummer AW, "Perceptual assessment of resonance and velopharyngeal function" 32 : 159-167, 2011

11 Chua HD, "Maxillary distraction versus orthognathic surgery in cleft lip and palate patients: effects on speech and velopharyngeal function" 39 : 633-640, 2010

12 Schwarz C, "Logopaedic findings following advancement of the maxilla" 4 : 40-55, 1976

13 Good PM, "Frequency of Le Fort I osteotomy after repaired cleft lip and palate or cleft palate" 44 : 396-401, 2007

14 Trindade IE, "Effects of orthognathic surgery on speech and breathing of subjects with cleft lip and palate: acoustic and aerodynamic assessment" 40 : 54-64, 2003

15 Peterson-Falzone SJ, "Cleft palate speech" Mosby 2001

16 Sell D, "A pilot study of the effects of transpalatal maxillary advancement on velopharyngeal closure in cleft palate patients" 30 : 349-354, 2002