OBJECTIVE: A retrospective study was conducted on the effect of primary rhinoplasty on infants with unilateral complete cleft lip nasal deformity.
METHODS: Infants with unilateral complete cleft lip in the Department of Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery, College of Stomatology, Xi\'an Jiaotong University were selected. All infants underwent cheiloplasty and primary rhinoplasty. We reconstructed the nasal base and corrected the nasal septum and alar deformity at the same time. The nasal splint was worn 1 week after the surgery. The nasal morphology before surgery as well as 1 week and 1 year after surgery were analyzed.
RESULTS: Significant differences were found on symmetry ratios including nasal base width, nostril height, alar angle and columella deviation angle between before and after operation (P<0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the symmetry ratio of nostril height and columella deviation angle between 1 year after surgery and 1 week after surgery (P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Infants with unilateral complete cleft lip nasal deformity can achieve satisfactory nasal morphology by primary rhinoplasty. Despite few cases of recurrence of nasal deformity, the nasal morphology can be well improved and maintained.
目的: 对单侧完全性唇裂患儿早期鼻畸形整复的手术效果进行回顾性研究，为唇裂鼻畸形整复提供一种治疗思路。方法: 选取于西安交通大学口腔医院就诊的24例单侧完全性唇裂患儿为研究对象，唇裂整复手术同期行鼻畸形整复，重建鼻基底，矫正鼻中隔，整复鼻翼部畸形。术后1周开始佩戴鼻模。评价术前、术后1周及术后1年鼻部形态。结果: 术后1周、术后1年患者的患/健侧鼻孔高度比、健/患侧鼻底宽度比、患/健侧鼻翼角度比、鼻小柱偏斜角度与术前相比，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；术后1年患者的患/健侧鼻孔高度比、鼻小柱偏斜角度与术后1周相比，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。结论: 单侧完全性唇裂早期鼻畸形整复可获较好的鼻部形态，尽管术后会有一些复发，但对称性仍优于术前，鼻部形态可以得到很好的矫正和维持。.

The aim of this systematic review was to establish the effect of different surgical repairs for the lip on nasal symmetry. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Ovid databases search was performed initially for only English-language articles, in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip with or without cleft alveolus and palate (UCCLAP) who were younger than 1 year of age and undergoing cleft lip repair, and are published from the earliest data available up to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome variable was nasal symmetry, with reported complications being secondary variables. A qualitative synthesis was provided. A total of 19,828 records were obtained, and 17 articles were selected for final review. Assessment of the risk of bias of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (N-1) was done with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB-2) tool, and the ROBINS-I tool was used for non-randomized studies (n = 14). Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was applied to evaluate the quality of the body of evidence. The majority of the included studies compared the triangular repair with the rotation advancement (RA) techniques, and preferred RA or its modifications. In terms of the nasal symmetry, the Fisher repair proved to be superior to the RA technique. Neither RA nor straight line repair was superior to one another. The Delaire technique may be preferred over the modified RA. Also, satisfactory outcomes were observed with simultaneous lip-nose repair. This systematic review examined a plethora of techniques, and the heterogeneity between studies was very high regarding type of surgery, method of nasal symmetry assessment, and length of follow-up, thus producing low-quality evidence; therefore, results should be interpreted with caution. Future research requires RCTs with larger sample sizes and appropriate length of follow-up, and surgeries preferably performed by a single experienced surgeon.

In the evolution of cleft lip repair, there have been continuous attempts to minimize local trauma and to improve lip and nasal appearances. In order to obtain an aesthetically balanced development of midface, the primary surgical correction of the nasolabial area is of paramount importance. In this study, the importance of a back-cut extending cephalically above the inferior turbinate at the mucocutaneous junction which elevates the nostril floor on the cleft side for the purpose of achieving symmetry of the alar bases are analyzed by pre and postoperative photographic anthropometry. This study comprised of fifty cases of the unilateral complete cleft lip. At the time of surgery, the patient age ranged from 3-9 months. The surgeries, performed by a single surgeon, employed the standard Millard technique, incorporating Mohler modifications of lip repair. Anthropometric analysis revealed that the preoperative mean difference between the normal side and the cleft side was 0.2056 with a standard deviation of 0.133. In the postoperative analysis, the mean difference was reduced to 0.0174 with a standard deviation of 0.141. The paired t-test showed that the p-value is <0.001, indicating high statistical significance. To conclude, in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate, the geometrically placed nasal back-cut incision has a definite role in the correction of the alar base symmetry during primary surgery.

The repair of unilateral cleft lip nose deformity remains a challenging endeavor for reconstructive surgeons for many reasons, one of which is the timing of rhinoplasty, whether to be synchronous or staged with cleft lip repair and the technique for rhinoplasty. Many authors now favor primary rhinoplasty with the cleft lip repair. Various surgical techniques have been used, most commonly the closed and open rhinoplasty techniques. In this randomized controlled prospective study, we compare the closed rhinoplasty technique with open rhinoplasty during primary unilateral cleft lip repair. Thirty-six patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and nose deformity were selected. Out of this 19 patients were assigned randomly and operated with open rhinoplasty and 17 patients with closed rhinoplasty. The cleft lip repair was done using modified, Millard\'s rotation-advancement technique in both the groups. Follow-up assessment was done after 6 months. Quantitative and qualitative analysis were done. Statistical analysis of the data was done using SPSS 11.0. Post-operatively, the alar base width difference between the open and closed rhinoplasty techniques was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in other parameters compared.