Comparative study between two different surgical techniques in veloplasty | ||||
| Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | ||||
| Article 3, Volume 12, Issue 2, April 2021, Page 95-104 PDF (725.74 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/omx.2022.82559.1122 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Elsaadany Wesam* 1; Sadakah Abdelfattah2; MKhalifa Mahmoud1; Bedir Rafic2 | ||||
| 1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial, Faculty of Dentistry,Tanta University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry,Tanta University, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Purpose: This study was planned to compare intravelar veloplasty versus Furlow double opposing z-plasty technique both clinically and by magnetic resonance imaging regarding effectiveness in palatal reconstruction and future imoprovement of soft palate function. Materials & Methods: This is an interventional, comparative study that was carried out on 16 patients with cleft palate and were divided randomly into two equal groups, Group I: included eight patients in whom soft palate cleft was repaired with intravelar veloplasty,Group II: included eight patients in whom soft palate cleft was repaired with Furlow double opposing z-plasty. All patients underwent regular follow up for six months for functional evaluation of the soft palate. Results: Clinically, there was primary wound healing uneventfully was achieved in all patients in the two groups with no signs of infection. No oronasal fistula was recorded in any case in the two groups. By magnetic resonance imaging, there was effectiveness in palatal reconstruction and future imoprovement of soft palate function which reported from a significant increase in soft palate length postoperatively in both groups with no significant differences between them, a significant decrease in retropalatal ditance postoperatively in both groups with no significant differences between them and the cohesive sling created by the two levator muscle bundles postoperatively in both groups. Conclusion: There was no statistically significant differences clinically and by magnetic resonance imaging between intravelar veloplasty and Furlow double opposing z-plasty technique. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Cleft palate; Veloplasty; Intravelar veloplasty; Furlow double opposing z-plasty technique | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 104 PDF Download: 187 |
||||
