Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 28, 2026

Method of Studying Palatal Fusion using Static Organ Culture
Published on: September 19, 2015
Evaluation of 5-year-old children with complete cleft lip and palate: Multicenter study. Part 2: Functional results
Caroline Dissaux1, Bruno Grollemund1, Frédéric Bodin1
1Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery Department (Head: Prof. C. Bruant-Rodier), Cleft Competence Center, Strasbourg University Hospital, 1 place de l'Hôpital Civil, 67091 Strasbourg, France.
Background And Purpose:
Cleft surgery is marked by all the controversies and the multiplication of protocols, as it has been shown by the Eurocleft study. The objective of this pilot study is to start a comparison and analyzing procedure between primary surgical protocols in French centers.
Methods:
Four French centers with different primary surgical protocols for cleft lip and palate repair, have accepted to be involved in this retrospective study. In each center, 20 consecutive patients with complete cleft lip and palate (10 UCLP, 10 BCLP per center), non syndromic, have been evaluated at a mean age of 5 [range, 4-6]. In this second part, maxillary growth and palatine morphology were assessed on clinical examination and on dental casts (Goslon score). Speech was also evaluated clinically (Borel-maisonny classification) and by Aerophonoscope.
Results:
Veau-Wardill-Killner palatoplasty involves a higher rate of transversal maxillary deficiency and retromaxillary. The fistula rate is statistically lower with tibial periosteum graft hard palate closure but this technique seems to give retromaxillary. Malek and Talmant two-stage-palatoplasty techniques reach Goslon scores of 1 or 2. Considering speech, Sommerlad intravelar veloplasty got higher outcomes.
Conclusions:
Primary results. Extension to other centers required. The two-stage palatoplasty, including a Sommerlad intravelar veloplasty seems to have the less negative impact on maxillary growth, and to give good speech outcomes.
Level Of Evidence:
Therapeutic study. Level III/retrospective multicenter comparative study.

