Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 21, 2025
Author Spotlight: Advancing Endoscopic Ossiculoplasty – Techniques, Innovations, and Practical Guidance for Clinical Integration
Published on: January 26, 2024
Effect of palatoplasty technique on otologic outcomes in children with cleft palate
Shaina W Gong1, Paul Hung2, Chioma G Obinero3
1Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, McGovern Medical School at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, United States.
Background:
In patients with cleft palate (CP), the impact of primary palatoplasty technique on otologic outcomes remains a major point of contention. While some studies report improved outcomes after certain techniques of palatal repair, there is a lack of consensus on the most effective procedure.
Objective:
We sought to characterize the effects of primary palatoplasty technique on otologic outcomes in children with CP.
Methods:
A single institution retrospective review of patients with CP who underwent primary palatoplasty (straight-line repair or Furlow Z-plasty) was performed. Primary outcomes of interest included time to placement of T-tubes, number of tympanostomy tube placements, tympanic membrane (TM) perforation, and 3-year and 6-year postoperative hearing thresholds.
Results:
A total of 140 patients were included in this study. The mean number of tympanostomy tube placements in the straight-line repair group (1.93 ± 1.28) was significantly higher than in the Furlow Z-plasty group (1.42 ± 1.03, p = 0.03). Median time from primary palate repair to T-tube placement was 38.93 (IQR 33.03) months. Higher birth weight (p < 0.01) and multiple tympanostomy tube placements (p < 0.05) were associated with longer time to T-tube placement. T-tube replacement was associated with a 16.9 times higher likelihood of TM perforation (p < 0.05). The median PTA significantly improved from 16.25 (IQR 7) dB at 3 years to 11.00 (IQR 5.25) dB at 6 years (p < 0.01).
Conclusions:
Furlow palatoplasty technique was associated with fewer number of tympanostomy tube placements; however, palatoplasty technique did not significantly impact time to T-tube placement, TM perforation, or hearing outcomes. There were no significant differences in long-term hearing outcomes between patients who underwent Furlow Z-plasty and those who had straight-line repair. Most patients achieved normal hearing thresholds by 6 years after primary palatoplasty and tympanostomy tube placement. These are important considerations to discuss when counseling patients' families on surgical management of CP and otologic outcomes.
