Objective: To evaluate the effect of timing of hard palate repair on facial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate, with special reference to cranial base, maxilla, mandible, jaw relation, and incisor relation. Design: A systematic review. Methods: The search strategy was based on the key words “facial growth,” “cleft lip palate,” and “timing of (hard) palate repair.” Case reports, case-series, and studies with no control or comparison group in the sample were excluded. Results: Fifteen studies met the selection criteria. All the studies were retrospective and nonrandomized. Five studies used cephalometry and casts, seven used cephalometry, and three used casts. Methodological deficiencies and heterogeneity of the studies prevented major conclusions. Conclusion: The review highlights the importance of further research. Prospective well-designed, controlled studies, especially targeting long-term results, are required to elucidate the effect of timing of hard palate repair on facial growth in patients with cleft lip and palate.

Objective: To investigate whether timing of hard palate repair had a significant effect on facial growth in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective longitudinal study. Setting: Sri Lankan Cleft Lip and Palate Project. Patients: A total of 104 patients with nonsyndromic UCLP who had hard palate repair by age 13 years, with their 290 cephalometric radiographs taken after lip and palate repair. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical notes were used to record surgical treatment histories. Cephalometry was used to determine facial morphology and growth rate. Results: Timing of hard palate repair had a significant effect on the length and protrusion of the alveolar maxilla (PMP-A and SNA, respectively) and the anteroposterior alveolar jaw relation (ANB) at age 20 years but not on their growth rates. Conclusion: Timing of hard palate repair significantly affects the growth of the maxilla in patients with UCLP. Late hard palate repair has a smaller adverse effect than does early hard palate repair on the growth of the maxilla. This timing effect primarily affects the anteroposterior development of the maxillary dentoalveolus and is attributed to the development being undisturbed before closure of the hard palate.

Objective: To investigate whether timing of hard palate repair, before versus after pubertal peak velocity age, had a significant effect on facial growth in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting: Sri Lankan Cleft Lip and Palate Project. Patients: A total of 125 adult patients with nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate were recruited and their last cephalometric radiographs were used. Main Outcome Measures: Clinical notes were used to record surgical treatment histories. Cephalometry was used to determine facial morphology. Results: The patients who had hard palate repair after pubertal peak velocity age had a deeper bony pharynx (Ba-PMP), a longer alveolar maxilla (PMP-A), a longer effective length of the maxilla (Ar-ANS, Ar-A), and as a result had a more favorable anteroposterior jaw relation (ANS-N-Pog, ANB, NAPog) and larger overjet, compared with those who had hard palate repair before pubertal peak velocity age. Conclusion: Timing of hard palate repair significantly affects the growth of the maxilla in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Hard palate repair after (versus before) pubertal peak velocity age has a smaller adverse effect on the forward growth of the maxilla. This timing affects the forward displacement of the basal maxilla and the anteroposterior development of the maxillary dentoalveolus.