Observational studyClinical oral investigations2023
Effects of two flap palatoplasty versus furlow palatoplasty with buccal myomucosal flap on maxillary arch dimensions in patients with cleft palate at the primary dentition stage: a cohort study.
Observational study in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05405738 (Effect of 2 Flap Palatoplasty Versus Furlow With Buccinators Flap During Palatal Cleft Repair on the Maxillary Development Patterns in Comparison to Non-cleft Children at 5-6years of Age), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effect of 2 Flap Palatoplasty Versus Furlow With Buccinators Flap During Palatal Cleft Repair on the Maxillary Development Patterns in Comparison to Non-cleft Children at 5-6years of Age
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- The Use of Buccal Fat Pad Versus Buccal Mucosal Flap in Cleft Patient Palatoplasty-A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of two flap palatoplasty (TFP) versus Furlow palatoplasty with buccal myomucosal flap (FPBF) on maxillary arch dimensions in children at the primary dentition stage with cleft palate, in comparison to matching subjects without any craniofacial anomalies. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis study included 28 subjects with an age range of 5-6 years; 10 non-cleft subjects were included in the control group, 9 patients treated with TFP, and 9 patients treated with FPBF. For the included patients, the maxillary models were scanned using a desktop scanner to produce virtual models, and the maxillary dimension measurements were virtually completed. The produced measurements were compared between the 3 groups. Maxillary models of the 28 participants were evaluated.
resultsStatistically insignificant differences were detected between the 3 groups for arch symmetry measurements. Differences were detected in the inter-canine width between the 2 surgical groups and non-cleft group. Both arch length and posterior palatal depth significantly differ while comparing the TFP to the control group, with no differences between FPBF and the non-cleft group.
conclusionFurlow palatoplasty with buccal myomucosal flap might be considered a better surgical option than two flap palatoplasty for patients with cleft palate while evaluating maxillary arch dimensions at the primary dentition stage as a surgical outcome. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study gives insight into the surgical technique that has limited effect on the maxillary growth and dental arch dimension. Therefore, it decreases the need for orthodontic treatment and orthognathic surgery.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov ( NCT05405738 ).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.