Download PDF
Facial Plast Surg 2019; 35(01): 073-077
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1675633
Original Research
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Quantitative Evaluation of Nasolabial Alterations following Nasoalveolar Molding (NAM) Therapy in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip

Mairaj K. Ahmed
1   Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Departments of Dentistry/Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, Otolaryngology and Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
,
Anthony H. Bui
2   Departments of Surgery and Medical Education, The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
,
Rebecca Barnett
4   College of Arts and Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
,
Joseph J. Rousso
2   Departments of Surgery and Medical Education, The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
3   Division of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai, New York, New York
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
26 December 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The clinical benefit of nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is actively debated between cleft centers without clear consensus. Nasolabial measurements were performed on pediatric patients with unilateral clefts of the lip, with or without cleft palate, at an academic cleft/craniofacial center prior to and following NAM therapy between June 2015 and August 2016. The parameters of interest were: columella height and width, cleft nostril height and width, and lip width. Measurements were performed using photographs taken alongside a reference object. The image output was then scaled to the size of the reference object and the capture angle. Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to assess reliability of the photographic measurements. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation [SD]) were calculated to characterize the pre- and post-NAM measurements. Student's t-tests were performed to compare the pre-NAM versus post-NAM measurements. The primary objective was to measure the effect of NAM on the nasal aesthetic units that are known to be anatomically aberrant in the cleft lip patient. Nine patients were included in this study. Average pre-NAM age was 2.5 weeks, and average post-NAM age was 13 weeks. Average columellar height increased from 3.70 mm (SD = 0.14) pre-NAM to 5.85 mm (SD = 1.96) post-NAM (p < 0.01); average columellar width increased from 4.71 mm (SD = 0.49) to 5.93 mm (SD = 0.71) (p < 0.01); average cleft nostril height increased from 3.54 mm (SD = 2.97) to 6.81 mm (SD = 2.98) (p = 0.01); and average cleft nostril width decreased from 15.46 mm (SD = 2.91) to 11.05 mm (SD = 1.01) (p = 0.01). Average lip width decreased from 34.61 mm (SD = 1.73) to 33.87 mm (SD = 3.67); however, this change was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). This study objectively quantifies positive changes in nasal aesthetics associated with NAM therapy, providing further evidence for its utility as a presurgical treatment modality for optimal aesthetic nasal results in the unilateral cleft lip patient. The major limitation of this study was a lack of control group, as our center universally treats complete unilateral cleft lip patients with NAM therapy. However, the authors strongly believe that the positive aesthetic nasal findings would persist if compared with a non-NAM control group.

Keywords

cleft Lip - nasoalveolar molding - pediatric facial plastic surgery - cleft nasal deformity
 

  • References

  • 1 Grayson BH, Santiago PE, Brecht LE, Cutting CB. Presurgical nasoalveolar molding in infants with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1999; 36 (06) 486-498
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Grayson BH, Cutting CB. Presurgical nasoalveolar orthopedic molding in primary correction of the nose, lip, and alveolus of infants born with unilateral and bilateral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38 (03) 193-198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Shetye PR. Presurgical infant orthopedics. J Craniofac Surg 2012; 23 (01) 210-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Abbott MM, Meara JG. Nasoalveolar molding in cleft care: is it efficacious?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130 (03) 659-666
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Maillard S, Retrouvey J-M, Ahmed MK, Taub PJ. Correlation between nasoalveolar molding and surgical, aesthetic, functional and socioeconomic outcomes following primary repair surgery: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2017; 8 (03) e2
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rubin MS, Clouston S, Ahmed MM. , et al. Assessment of presurgical clefts and predicted surgical outcome in patients treated with and without nasoalveolar molding. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26 (01) 71-75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Broder HL, Flores RL, Clouston S. , et al. Surgeon's and caregivers' appraisals of primary cleft lip treatment with and without nasoalveolar molding: a prospective multicenter pilot study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (03) 938-945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Santiago PE, Grayson BH, Cutting CB, Gianoutsos MP, Brecht LE, Kwon SM. Reduced need for alveolar bone grafting by presurgical orthopedics and primary gingivoperiosteoplasty. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1998; 35 (01) 77-80
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Patel PA, Rubin MS, Clouston S. , et al. Comparative study of early secondary nasal revisions and costs in patients with clefts treated with and without nasoalveolar molding. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26 (04) 1229-1233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Pfeifer TM, Grayson BH, Cutting CB. Nasoalveolar molding and gingivoperiosteoplasty versus alveolar bone graft: an outcome analysis of costs in the treatment of unilateral cleft alveolus. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2002; 39 (01) 26-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Grayson BH, Garfinkle JS. Early cleft management: the case for nasoalveolar molding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 145 (02) 134-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hathaway RR, Long Jr RE. Early cleft management: in search of evidence. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 145 (02) 135-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 van der Heijden P, Dijkstra PU, Stellingsma C, van der Laan BF, Korsten-Meijer AGW, Goorhuis-Brouwer SM. Limited evidence for the effect of presurgical nasoalveolar molding in unilateral cleft on nasal symmetry: a call for unified research. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131 (01) 62e-71e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Chang C-S, Liao Y-F, Wallace CG. , et al. Long-term comparison of the results of four techniques used for bilateral cleft nose repair: a single surgeon's experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134 (06) 926e-936e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Maull DJ, Grayson BH, Cutting CB. , et al. Long-term effects of nasoalveolar molding on three-dimensional nasal shape in unilateral clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1999; 36 (05) 391-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Barillas I, Dec W, Warren SM, Cutting CB, Grayson BH. Nasoalveolar molding improves long-term nasal symmetry in complete unilateral cleft lip-cleft palate patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123 (03) 1002-1006
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Lee CTH, Garfinkle JS, Warren SM, Brecht LE, Cutting CB, Grayson BH. Nasoalveolar molding improves appearance of children with bilateral cleft lip-cleft palate. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 122 (04) 1131-1137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Shetty V, Agrawal RK, Sailer HF. Long-term effect of presurgical nasoalveolar molding on growth of maxillary arch in unilateral cleft lip and palate: randomized controlled trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017; 46 (08) 977-987
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Liang Z, Yao J, Chen PKT, Zheng C, Yang J. Effect of presurgical nasoalveolar molding on nasal symmetry in unilateral complete cleft lip/palate patients after primary cheiloplasty without concomitant nasal cartilage dissection: early childhood evaluation. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2018; ; (February): 14296
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Clark SL, Teichgraeber JF, Fleshman RG. , et al. Long-term treatment outcome of presurgical nasoalveolar molding in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22 (01) 333-336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Shaye D, Liu CC, Tollefson TT. Cleft lip and palate: an evidence-based review. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2015; 23 (03) 357-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar