search
Back to results

Cleft Orthognathic Surgery Versus Distraction Osteogenesis - Which is Better?

Primary Purpose

Cleft Lip and Palate, Maxillary Hypoplasia

Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 2
Locations
Hong Kong
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Orthognathic surgery
Distraction osteogenesis
Sponsored by
The University of Hong Kong
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Cleft Lip and Palate focused on measuring cleft lip and palate, distraction osteogenesis, conventional orthognathic surgery, stability, morbidity, soft tissue changes, psychological adjustment, speech changes, velopharyngeal function

Eligibility Criteria

16 Years - undefined (Child, Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Cleft lip and palate patients who required maxillary advancement ranging from 4-10 mm

Exclusion Criteria:

  • syndromic cases, skeletal maturity not yet reached

Sites / Locations

  • OMFS, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

1

2

Arm Description

Group 1 will receive Conventional orthognathic surgery

Group 2 will receive distraction osteogenesis

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

standardized questionnaires, lateral cephalographs,nasoendoscopy, nasometry

Secondary Outcome Measures

Full Information

First Posted
January 21, 2009
Last Updated
September 12, 2011
Sponsor
The University of Hong Kong
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT00930124
Brief Title
Cleft Orthognathic Surgery Versus Distraction Osteogenesis - Which is Better?
Official Title
Distraction Versus Orthognathic Surgery - Which One is Better for Cleft Palate Patients
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
September 2011
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
June 2002 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
October 2004 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
January 2008 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Name of the Sponsor
The University of Hong Kong

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Cleft lip and palate patients normally present with a sunken face due to collapse in the middle part of the face and inability of the upper and lower teeth to meet during chewing. This situation constitutes a serious aesthetic and mastication problem. A single surgical operation known as orthognathic surgery was traditionally performed to move the upper jaw forward to a more normal position and allow chewing function to be regained. However, due to scar tissue from the original surgical repair of the cleft palate, this procedure is known to be unstable causing bone to rapidly go back to its original position. A new concept of moving the upper jaw bone gradually by 1mm per day using a special device attached to the bone called distraction osteogenesis was established in 1996. Animal studies have shown that this technique can produce stable results with minimal relapse. The feasibility of correcting cleft deformities by gradual distraction has been confirmed by our own clinical studies. The aim of this study (which is the first of its kind) is to conduct a prospective randomized controlled study and compare the treatment outcomes of the current standard (orthognathic surgery) with distraction osteogenesis (gradual bone movement). The objectives focus on four aspects: morbidity, stability, speech function and psychological impact. The results from this study will clarify several clinical dilemmas in decision making when choosing whether to use orthognathic surgery or distraction osteogenesis in the treatment of cleft lip and palate patients. In addition, it will also inform our multidisciplinary research team to improve the total care of the cleft lip and palate patients. Gradual bone distraction of the midface in cleft palate patients is more stable, less detrimental to speech, and no more troublesome to the patient than conventional osteotomy and bone transposition (orthognathic surgery).
Detailed Description
Maxillary hypoplasia leading to sunken midface is a common developmental problem in CLP patients and is related to a combination of congenital reduction in midfacial growth and the surgical scar from the repair of the cleft palate. Therefore CLP patients commonly present with short midface and narrow hard palate and severe malocclusion. Conventional orthognathic surgery can advance, expand and lengthen the maxilla to a normal position in relation to the skull and the occlusion. However, such immediate surgical transposition of the cleft maxilla is technically difficult due to the severe deformity demanding large surgical movement and the tension from the palatal scar. Studies have demonstrated that the repositioned maxilla is rather unstable in the long term. In addition, velopharyngeal competence could be compromised by this immediate advancement technique resulting in abnormally nasal speech. The feasibility of gradual lengthening of the under-developed mandible in syndromal patients by distraction osteogenesis has been proven. The gradual movement of the maxilla activated by the implanted distractors can theoretically overcome the tension from the palatal scar and the soft palate musculature. This may reduce the long term skeletal relapse of the cleft maxilla and the speech distortion. On the other hand, the distraction procedures involve the surgical insertion and removal operations and the retention of the devices over a two month period. This may increase the chance of infection, social inconvenience and ultimately affect the patient's satisfaction.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Cleft Lip and Palate, Maxillary Hypoplasia
Keywords
cleft lip and palate, distraction osteogenesis, conventional orthognathic surgery, stability, morbidity, soft tissue changes, psychological adjustment, speech changes, velopharyngeal function

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 2
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
60 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
1
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Group 1 will receive Conventional orthognathic surgery
Arm Title
2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Group 2 will receive distraction osteogenesis
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Orthognathic surgery
Other Intervention Name(s)
cleft osteotomy
Intervention Description
Patients with moderate maxillary hypoplasia needing an advancement of 4-10mm
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Distraction osteogenesis
Other Intervention Name(s)
cleft distraction
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
standardized questionnaires, lateral cephalographs,nasoendoscopy, nasometry
Time Frame
intra-operative and post-operatively at 2-6 weeks, 2,3,6,months, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 years

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
16 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Cleft lip and palate patients who required maxillary advancement ranging from 4-10 mm Exclusion Criteria: syndromic cases, skeletal maturity not yet reached
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Lim K Cheung, BDS, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
The University of Hong Kong
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
OMFS, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong
City
Sai Ying Pun
Country
Hong Kong

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Learn more about this trial

Cleft Orthognathic Surgery Versus Distraction Osteogenesis - Which is Better?

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs