The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial

Background: This study aimed to use anthropometric measurements taken pre- and post-operation to evaluate quantitative assessment of modified Millard technique compared with Tennison-Randall technique in unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair. Materials and Methods: Prospective randomised controlled stud...

وصف كامل

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
الحاوية / القاعدة:African Journal of Paediatric Surgery
المؤلفون الرئيسيون: Khaled Salah Abdullateef, Mohamed A M. Nagaty, Mohamed Fathy, Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi, Abeer Aboalazayem, Mohamed H Abouelfadl
التنسيق: مقال
اللغة:الإنجليزية
منشور في: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2024-01-01
الموضوعات:
الوصول للمادة أونلاين:http://www.afrjpaedsurg.org/article.asp?issn=0189-6725;year=2024;volume=21;issue=1;spage=12;epage=17;aulast=Abdullateef
_version_ 1850109993285582848
author Khaled Salah Abdullateef
Mohamed A M. Nagaty
Mohamed Fathy
Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi
Abeer Aboalazayem
Mohamed H Abouelfadl
author_facet Khaled Salah Abdullateef
Mohamed A M. Nagaty
Mohamed Fathy
Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi
Abeer Aboalazayem
Mohamed H Abouelfadl
author_sort Khaled Salah Abdullateef
collection DOAJ
container_title African Journal of Paediatric Surgery
description Background: This study aimed to use anthropometric measurements taken pre- and post-operation to evaluate quantitative assessment of modified Millard technique compared with Tennison-Randall technique in unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair. Materials and Methods: Prospective randomised controlled study recruited infants scheduled for UCL repair. Infants aged 2–6 months, either complete or incomplete deformity. A total of 68 patients were randomised in 1:1 ratio to undergo either modified Millard technique (Group I) or Tennison-Randall technique (Group II). Results: Group I had significantly longer operative time than Group II (85.7 ± 7.4 vs. 68.7 ± 8.8 min, respectively; P < 0.001). Group I has less post-operative wound infection, wound dehiscence and wound scarring than Group II, but Group II has less post-operative lip notch. In Group I, greater increases in post-operative horizontal lip length and vertical lip height were observed, compared to Group II, without statistically significant difference. Group I showed a greater reduction in nasal width and total nasal width than Group II, without statistically significance. Group II had a greater increase in philtral height. However, only post-operative Cupid's-bow width was significantly different between two groups (P = 0.041). Conclusion: Overall results demonstrate no significant differences between modified Millard technique and Tennison-Randall technique.
format Article
id doaj-art-a51c7674fd094d00a9977276de3a0f26
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 0189-6725
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
spelling doaj-art-a51c7674fd094d00a9977276de3a0f262025-08-20T00:00:03ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsAfrican Journal of Paediatric Surgery0189-67252024-01-01211121710.4103/ajps.ajps_99_22The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trialKhaled Salah AbdullateefMohamed A M. NagatyMohamed FathyKhaled Abdelmoneim ElmenawiAbeer AboalazayemMohamed H AbouelfadlBackground: This study aimed to use anthropometric measurements taken pre- and post-operation to evaluate quantitative assessment of modified Millard technique compared with Tennison-Randall technique in unilateral cleft lip (UCL) repair. Materials and Methods: Prospective randomised controlled study recruited infants scheduled for UCL repair. Infants aged 2–6 months, either complete or incomplete deformity. A total of 68 patients were randomised in 1:1 ratio to undergo either modified Millard technique (Group I) or Tennison-Randall technique (Group II). Results: Group I had significantly longer operative time than Group II (85.7 ± 7.4 vs. 68.7 ± 8.8 min, respectively; P < 0.001). Group I has less post-operative wound infection, wound dehiscence and wound scarring than Group II, but Group II has less post-operative lip notch. In Group I, greater increases in post-operative horizontal lip length and vertical lip height were observed, compared to Group II, without statistically significant difference. Group I showed a greater reduction in nasal width and total nasal width than Group II, without statistically significance. Group II had a greater increase in philtral height. However, only post-operative Cupid's-bow width was significantly different between two groups (P = 0.041). Conclusion: Overall results demonstrate no significant differences between modified Millard technique and Tennison-Randall technique.http://www.afrjpaedsurg.org/article.asp?issn=0189-6725;year=2024;volume=21;issue=1;spage=12;epage=17;aulast=Abdullateefmillard techniquetennison-randall techniqueunilateral cleft lip
spellingShingle Khaled Salah Abdullateef
Mohamed A M. Nagaty
Mohamed Fathy
Khaled Abdelmoneim Elmenawi
Abeer Aboalazayem
Mohamed H Abouelfadl
The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
millard technique
tennison-randall technique
unilateral cleft lip
title The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
title_full The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
title_fullStr The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
title_full_unstemmed The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
title_short The outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison-randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair: A comparative trial
title_sort outcomes of modified millard technique versus tennison randall technique in unilateral cleft lip repair a comparative trial
topic millard technique
tennison-randall technique
unilateral cleft lip
url http://www.afrjpaedsurg.org/article.asp?issn=0189-6725;year=2024;volume=21;issue=1;spage=12;epage=17;aulast=Abdullateef
work_keys_str_mv AT khaledsalahabdullateef theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedamnagaty theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedfathy theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT khaledabdelmoneimelmenawi theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT abeeraboalazayem theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedhabouelfadl theoutcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT khaledsalahabdullateef outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedamnagaty outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedfathy outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT khaledabdelmoneimelmenawi outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT abeeraboalazayem outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial
AT mohamedhabouelfadl outcomesofmodifiedmillardtechniqueversustennisonrandalltechniqueinunilateralcleftliprepairacomparativetrial