ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
A Summary of the Existing Data on Cleft Surgical Outcomes: What Do We Not Know?
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advanced Strategies in the Repair of Alveolar Cleft Defects: Biological Approaches, Biomaterials, and Future Perspectives.Progress in molecular and subcellular biology · 2026Review
- A Summary of the Existing Data on Cleft Surgical Outcomes: What Do We Not Know?Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Globally, cleft surgical protocols have nuanced differences between centers, yet the goals of cleft lip and palate (CLP) repair are similar. These protocols all aim to achieve optimal aesthetic appearance and speech outcomes while limiting significant complications such as velopharyngeal insufficiency and midface hypoplasia. Variability in complication rates following primary CLP repair has been well documented within the literature. A series of systematic reviews investigate the impact of factors on surgical outcomes, all demonstrating an inability to comment on the ideal technique and timing to optimize outcomes. This article presents a summary of the current state of the literature on surgical outcomes following CLP repair. Studies were limited by small samples sizes; standardized measurement tools; study design; and lack of diversity in cleft phenotype, severity, and patient population. These limitations highlight the need for further research with more representative populations globally, standardized measurement tools, and a global consortium of cleft surgeons to make recommendations based on improved data. As the need for training in cleft surgery expands across the globe, evidence-based algorithms are essential to optimize outcomes and limit costly complications.
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.