A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate
Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been propose...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Tulasi Nayak [verfasserIn] Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy [verfasserIn] Renu Parmar [verfasserIn] Pritham N Shetty [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies - Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020, 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:8 ; year:2021 ; number:1 ; pages:35-40 |
| Links: |
Link aufrufen |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ054924332 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | DOAJ054924332 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230308184818.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a RK1-715 | |
| 050 | 0 | |a RD1-811 | |
| 100 | 0 | |a Tulasi Nayak |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a burden of care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a cleft lip and palate | |
| 650 | 4 | |a nasoalveolar molding | |
| 650 | 4 | |a revision surgery | |
| 650 | 4 | |a secondary surgeries | |
| 650 | 4 | |a unilateral | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Dentistry | |
| 653 | 0 | |a Surgery | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Renu Parmar |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Pritham N Shetty |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |d Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 |g 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 |w (DE-627)172525428X |x 23483644 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:8 |g year:2021 |g number:1 |g pages:35-40 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 8 |j 2021 |e 1 |h 35-40 | ||
| author_variant |
t n tn b k bk r p rp p n s pns |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:23483644:2021----::cmaaiesesetfeodrsreisewensavoamligraeadonsavoamligraep |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
| callnumber-subject-code |
RK |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 doi (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 RD1-811 Tulasi Nayak verfasserin aut A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy verfasserin aut Renu Parmar verfasserin aut Pritham N Shetty verfasserin aut In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 (DE-627)172525428X 23483644 nnns volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 kostenfrei http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 8 2021 1 35-40 |
| spelling |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 doi (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 RD1-811 Tulasi Nayak verfasserin aut A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy verfasserin aut Renu Parmar verfasserin aut Pritham N Shetty verfasserin aut In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 (DE-627)172525428X 23483644 nnns volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 kostenfrei http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 8 2021 1 35-40 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 doi (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 RD1-811 Tulasi Nayak verfasserin aut A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy verfasserin aut Renu Parmar verfasserin aut Pritham N Shetty verfasserin aut In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 (DE-627)172525428X 23483644 nnns volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 kostenfrei http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 8 2021 1 35-40 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 doi (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 RD1-811 Tulasi Nayak verfasserin aut A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy verfasserin aut Renu Parmar verfasserin aut Pritham N Shetty verfasserin aut In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 (DE-627)172525428X 23483644 nnns volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 kostenfrei http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 8 2021 1 35-40 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 doi (DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 RD1-811 Tulasi Nayak verfasserin aut A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy verfasserin aut Renu Parmar verfasserin aut Pritham N Shetty verfasserin aut In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 (DE-627)172525428X 23483644 nnns volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 kostenfrei http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 8 2021 1 35-40 |
| language |
English |
| source |
In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 |
| sourceStr |
In Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies 8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40 volume:8 year:2021 number:1 pages:35-40 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral Dentistry Surgery |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Tulasi Nayak @@aut@@ Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy @@aut@@ Renu Parmar @@aut@@ Pritham N Shetty @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
172525428X |
| id |
DOAJ054924332 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ054924332</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308184818.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ054924332</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tulasi Nayak</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">burden of care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cleft lip and palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nasoalveolar molding</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">revision surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">secondary surgeries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">unilateral</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Renu Parmar</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pritham N Shetty</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020</subfield><subfield code="g">8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)172525428X</subfield><subfield code="x">23483644</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:8</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:35-40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">8</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">35-40</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| callnumber-first |
R - Medicine |
| author |
Tulasi Nayak |
| spellingShingle |
Tulasi Nayak misc RK1-715 misc RD1-811 misc burden of care misc cleft lip and palate misc nasoalveolar molding misc revision surgery misc secondary surgeries misc unilateral misc Dentistry misc Surgery A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| authorStr |
Tulasi Nayak |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)172525428X |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| remote_str |
true |
| callnumber-label |
RK1-715 |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
23483644 |
| topic_title |
RK1-715 RD1-811 A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate burden of care cleft lip and palate nasoalveolar molding revision surgery secondary surgeries unilateral |
| topic |
misc RK1-715 misc RD1-811 misc burden of care misc cleft lip and palate misc nasoalveolar molding misc revision surgery misc secondary surgeries misc unilateral misc Dentistry misc Surgery |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc RK1-715 misc RD1-811 misc burden of care misc cleft lip and palate misc nasoalveolar molding misc revision surgery misc secondary surgeries misc unilateral misc Dentistry misc Surgery |
| topic_browse |
misc RK1-715 misc RD1-811 misc burden of care misc cleft lip and palate misc nasoalveolar molding misc revision surgery misc secondary surgeries misc unilateral misc Dentistry misc Surgery |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
172525428X |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)172525428X |
| title |
A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ054924332 (DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 |
| title_full |
A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| author_sort |
Tulasi Nayak |
| journal |
Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |
| journalStr |
Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies |
| callnumber-first-code |
R |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
35 |
| author_browse |
Tulasi Nayak Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy Renu Parmar Pritham N Shetty |
| container_volume |
8 |
| class |
RK1-715 RD1-811 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Tulasi Nayak |
| doi_str_mv |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| callnumber |
RK1-715 |
| title_auth |
A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| abstract |
Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. |
| abstractGer |
Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
| container_issue |
1 |
| title_short |
A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7 http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125 https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy Renu Parmar Pritham N Shetty |
| author2Str |
Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy Renu Parmar Pritham N Shetty |
| ppnlink |
172525428X |
| callnumber-subject |
RK - Dentistry |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20 |
| callnumber-a |
RK1-715 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T01:08:07.941Z |
| _version_ |
1803608693618507776 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ054924332</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308184818.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ054924332</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJcfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tulasi Nayak</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">A comparative assessment of secondary surgeries between nasoalveolar molding-treated and non nasoalveolar molding-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Introduction: Secondary surgeries are a commonly documented element of cleft treatment. It adds to the surgical and economic burden of care. Nasoalveolar molding (NAM) is one of the techniques which has gained popularity as it has proven to reduce the pre surgical severity. NAM has also been proposed to reduce the need for future secondary surgeries. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the incidence of secondary surgeries in NAM treated and non-NAM-treated patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Methods: In this retrospective study, all consecutively treated NAM and non-NAM patients with UCLP who had undergone primary surgeries in 2011–2013 were considered. Only those patients who had a complete clinical and surgical record at 5 years of age were included for this study. Thirty-eight patients in NAM group and 48 patients in non-NAM group were compared. All patients had received the same protocol with the exception of NAM. The cleft severity index was used to check the preoperative cleft severity. The type of lip defect was described for all patients who had received the secondary surgery. Results: Pre NAM clefts were found to be more severe than the non-NAM group. However, after the NAM therapy, the cleft severity was less than the non-NAM group. Non-NAM group had a statistically higher number of lip revision surgeries with a broader variety of defects than the NAM group. There was no statistically significant difference for the Fistula closures. Conclusion: NAM reduced the cleft severity at the pre surgical stage. At 5 years of follow-up, NAM-treated patients had a lower surgical burden of care in comparison to the non-NAM-treated patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">burden of care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cleft lip and palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">nasoalveolar molding</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">revision surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">secondary surgeries</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">unilateral</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bonanthaya Krishnamurthy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Renu Parmar</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pritham N Shetty</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Anomalies</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2020</subfield><subfield code="g">8(2021), 1, Seite 35-40</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)172525428X</subfield><subfield code="x">23483644</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:8</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:35-40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/jclpca.jclpca_36_20</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/cfe38227eb6d4cd2b3d853217bb457d7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.jclpca.org/article.asp?issn=2348-2125;year=2021;volume=8;issue=1;spage=35;epage=40;aulast=Nayak</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2348-2125</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2348-3644</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">8</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">35-40</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.40263 |