Predictors of Velopharyngeal Insufficiency in Cleft Palate Orthognathic Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to appraise the value of preoperative speech assessments, nasopharyngoscopy, and surgical models as predictors of velopharyngeal deterioration after a Le Fort I maxillary advancement in cleft patients. This retrospective study involved a series of 26 cleft patients (16 unilateral complete and nine bilateral complete cleft lips and palates, and one isolated complete cleft palate) who had Le Fort I maxillary advancements between March 1, 1993, and February 7, 1996. The 13 male patients and 13 female patients ranged in age from 15.3 to 46 years (mean age, 19.5 years). Four of these patients had previously undergone pharyngeal flap surgery. Eleven patients had palatal fistulas and one had a bifid uvula that was repaired at the time of orthognathic surgery. Patients with perceived hypernasal speech preoperatively all had hypernasality after advancement (nine of nine). Velopharyngeal insufficiency was observed in two of the 16 whose resonance preoperatively was within normal limits. Speech assessment, therefore, predicted accurately the postoperative status in 23 of 26 patients. Twelve patients had preoperative nasopharyngoscopy that indicated a high risk for velopharyngeal insufficiency (borderline or inadequate closure). Nine of these patients had postoperative velopharyngeal insufficiency. Two of the 14 patients not judged at risk by nasopharyngoscopy developed velopharyngeal insufficiency. Therefore, 21 of the 26 patients were accurately predicted by nasopharyngoscopy. Scoping detected borderline velopharyngeal insufficiency in one patient who was not detected by speech alone. The combined predictive value of speech and scope identified all but one patient who would develop postoperative velopharyngeal insufficiency. The degree of anteroposterior movement determined from surgical models was not predictive of the outcome. Patients with hypernasal speech preoperatively continue to have hypernasal speech after Le Fort I advancement. Preoperative perceptual speech assessment by specially trained speech-language pathologists is an excellent test for predicting postoperative velopharyngeal insufficiency status. Nasopharyngoscopy is an invasive and resource-dependent test that should be assessed with respect to cost effectiveness. In this series, only one patient's risk was more accurately predicted using nasopharyngoscopy than by speech assessment alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".