3.8 Article Proceedings Paper

The Pittsburgh fistula classification system: A standardized scheme for the description of palatal fistulas

期刊

CLEFT PALATE-CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL
卷 44, 期 6, 页码 590-594

出版社

ALLIANCE COMMUNICATIONS GROUP DIVISION ALLEN PRESS
DOI: 10.1597/06-204.1

关键词

classification; cleft palate; cleft palate fistula; fistula; fistula classification system

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Vague terminology is a problem in cleft palate research. No classification scheme for palatal fistulas has been proposed to date. Although a well-healed velum is a significant outcome of palatoplasty, it is nearly impossible to compare fistula-related palatoplasty results in the literature or in medical records without a standardized vocabulary. We endeavor to devise a palatal fistula classification system that may have clinical and research applicability. Design: PubMed was searched for definitions and classifications of palatal fistula as well as incidence and recurrence rates of this outcome. Next, a 25-year retrospective review of our Cleft Center's records was performed, and fistulas were identified (n = 641 charts reviewed). The fistula descriptions yielded by this chart review were evaluated in the context of anatomical descriptions in the literature, and a clinician-friendly classification scheme was designed. Results: A literature review failed to reveal a standardized fistula classification system. An anatomically based numerical fistula classification system was devised: type I, bifid uvula; type II, soft palate; type III, junction of the soft and hard palate; type IV, hard palate; type V, junction of the primary and secondary palates (for Veau IV clefts); type VI, lingual alveolar; and type VII, labial alveolar. Conclusions: We propose a standardized numerical classification system for palatal fistulas. Its clinical adoption may prospectively clarify ambiguities in the literature and facilitate future cleft palate research and clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据