What Does Cleft Lip and Palate Care Cost? The Time and Economic-Associated Burden of Care From Birth to Maturity.

This study aims to describe the burden of care (BoC) for the management of patients with nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) by identifying provider burden, characterizing an interaction burden, and calculating an economic burden associated with their health system interactions. A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients with nonsyndromic CLP treated at a pediatric tertiary hospital between January 1, 1999, and April 30, 2021. Healthcare utilization data for inpatient and outpatient interactions were extracted.

One-Year Stability of LeFort I Advancement in Patients With Complete Cleft Lip and Palate Using a Standardized Clinical and Surgical Protocol.

Aim: To assess treatment outcome and 1-year stability of LeFort I advancement in patients with complete cleft lip and palate.

Methods: Thirty-five patients (age 20.65 ± 2.

Prevalence of Dental Anomalies in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Alveolus Treated With Gingivoperiosteoplasty.

Objective: To compare the prevalence of dental malformations and agenesis in patients who received or did not receive gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP).

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Patients: Review of patients born January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2007, with unilateral cleft lip and alveolus, with or without clefting of the secondary palate, who received GPP and/or secondary alveolar bone grafting (ABG).

Sociodemographic Predictors of Treatment Success and Difficulty in Nasoalveolar Molding.

Objective: To assess social and demographic influences on caregiver success and difficulty with nasoalveolar molding (NAM).

Design: Retrospective review identified patients who began NAM between April 22, 2013, and April 18, 2017, at the New York University Langone Medical Center. Records were reviewed, and the following sociodemographic data retrieved: parental marital status, parental ages, number of siblings, distance traveled to clinic, insurance coverage, concurrent medical conditions, and need for an interpreter.

Maxillomandibular and occlusal relationships in preadolescent patients with syndromic craniosynostosis treated by LeFort III distraction osteogenesis: 10-year surgical and phenotypic stability.

Introduction: 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.

Zygomatic Rotation-Advancement: A New Concept for the Correction of Exorbitism in Patients With Syndromic Craniosynostosis.

Background: The exophthalmos and class III malocclusion seen in Crouzon syndrome can be treated by Le Fort III advancement/distraction. However, reconstructive options for zygomatic retrusion are limited. The authors describe the repair of isolated exorbitism in a patient with Crouzon syndrome, via bilateral zygomatic rotation-advancement.

Proptosis Correction in Pre-Adolescent Patients With Syndromic Craniosynostosis by Le Fort III Distraction Osteogenesis.

Le Fort III distraction osteogenesis may be indicated in the treatment of syndromic craniosynostosis with severe midface retrusion and proptosis. This study assesses the stability of proptosis correction over 10-years.A retrospective review identified 15 patients with syndromic craniosynostosis treated by Le Fort III distraction prior to age 10 (9 males, 6 females; age 4.