ArticleAnnals of plastic surgery2025
Surgical Techniques for Cleft Lip Repair: Insights From Latin America and the Caribbean.
Article in Annals of plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cleft Care India Study: A National Audit on Patients with Non-Syndromic Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: Surgical Procedures and Outcomes.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCleft lip (CL) repair techniques vary significantly, often depending on surgeons' experience, preference, and cleft characteristics. In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), where CL prevalence is high, research on surgical practices remains limited. This study aims to document and analyze preferences for unilateral (UCL) and bilateral cleft lip (BCL) repair among Operation Smile surgeons in LAC to support improved cleft care.
methodsA 22-question survey was distributed anonymously electronically to credentialed LAC surgeons performing UCL and BCL repairs. The survey explored demographics, preferred repair techniques, and surgical approaches such as nasal floor closure, gingivoperiosteoplasty, and setback techniques. Responses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
resultsA total of 101 surgeons from 13 countries participated, with Peru (20%) having the highest representation. Most respondents were male (71%), with 36% having less than 5 years of experience. The Fisher technique was the most preferred method for UCL (66%) and BCL (29%), particularly among less experienced surgeons. Technique preferences varied significantly by country ( P < 0.001). For UCL, most surgeons (78%) closed the nasal floor by joining septal and lateral mucosa, and 50% performed gingivoperiosteoplasty. For BCL, 58% used labial adhesion for maxillary protrusion, and 24% performed premaxillary setbacks, both varying significantly by experience and technique ( P < 0.001).
conclusionsThis study reveals substantial variability in cleft repair techniques across LAC, with the Fisher technique emerging as a dominant preference. These findings provide a foundation for future research focusing on outcomes and complications to optimize cleft care in the region.
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.