Nasoalveolar Molding Limits Early Lip Revisions in Cleft Patients Through Maturity

Mitigating the Long-Term Surgical Burden in Cleft Care

The management of cleft lip and palate requires a complex, multi-stage surgical trajectory that often extends from infancy through skeletal maturity. Presurgical nasoalveolar molding (NAM, an orthopedic technique used to approximate cleft segments and reshape nasal cartilage before initial repair) has become a standard adjunct to primary cheiloplasty [1, 2]. While short-term studies demonstrate that NAM effectively expands the mid-arch and improves neonatal aesthetics, its impact on long-term outcomes remains a subject of active clinical debate [3, 4]. Some evidence suggests that while NAM optimizes the initial surgical field, it may be associated with later midface hypoplasia or sagittal growth restrictions [5, 6]. Consequently, practicing clinicians face uncertainty regarding whether these early interventions truly translate into fewer revision surgeries as patients age [7, 8]. A new longitudinal study now provides critical data on revision rates and surgical outcomes in a cohort followed for nearly two decades, offering clarity on the lifelong operative burden for these patients.

Longitudinal Cohort Reaching Skeletal Maturity

To determine the true long-term surgical burden associated with early intervention, researchers conducted a single-institution retrospective review of patients with a cleft who underwent nasoalveolar molding between 1995 and 2005. The study specifically excluded patients with incomplete medical records prior to reaching skeletal maturity (the developmental stage at which facial bone growth is complete), ensuring the findings reflected definitive outcomes. This rigorous selection process yielded a final cohort of 81 patients who were followed for an average of 18.8 years at the time of their last clinical assessment. The study population consisted of 46 male (57%) and 35 female (43%) patients. To evaluate how initial anatomical presentation influenced the need for subsequent procedures, the authors documented that 52 patients (64%) presented with unilateral clefts, while 29 patients (36%) had bilateral clefts. By querying operative reports for all interventions performed on the lip and nose from the primary repair through the attainment of facial maturity, the researchers provided a comprehensive view of the secondary procedures required after standardized presurgical molding in infancy.

Lip Revision Rates and Statistical Comparisons

The longitudinal analysis revealed that while a significant portion of the cohort eventually underwent secondary procedures, the timing of these interventions was heavily weighted toward the completion of facial growth. Among the 81 patients followed, revision to the lip was carried out in 36 patients (44%). Crucially for pediatric surgical planning, the researchers found that only 3 patients (3.7%) required lip revision prior to reaching facial maturity. This suggests that the initial repair facilitated by nasoalveolar molding provided sufficient aesthetic and functional stability throughout the childhood and adolescent growth phases. More extensive secondary interventions were also tracked, with re-repair of the lip performed in 10 patients (12%) over the follow-up period. To evaluate whether the initial severity of the cleft influenced the long-term surgical burden, the researchers compared outcomes between different presentations. The data showed that lip revision rates were 48% for bilateral clefts and 37.9% for unilateral clefts, a difference that did not reach statistical significance (p=0.38). The authors confirmed these findings using the Pearson correlation coefficient (a measure of linear strength between two variables) and two-paired student t-tests (a statistical method to determine significant differences between group means). The lack of significant variance indicates that the benefits of presurgical molding in stabilizing nasolabial anatomy are comparable across both unilateral and bilateral presentations.

Nasal Reconstruction Trends from Adolescence to Adulthood

The data highlights a distinct separation between nasal interventions performed during active growth and those deferred until the completion of facial development. The researchers found that immature cleft rhinoplasty (nasal surgery performed before facial growth is complete) was performed in 3 patients (4%). When examining these early interventions based on the initial anatomical presentation, the procedure was reported more commonly among patients with a unilateral cleft (23%) than a bilateral cleft (10%). Despite this numerical difference, the statistical analysis indicated that the variation was not significant (p=0.18). This suggests that the stability provided by nasoalveolar molding helps clinicians delay definitive nasal reconstruction regardless of the initial cleft type. As patients reached the end of their developmental trajectory, the utilization of definitive surgical correction increased. The study reports that mature rhinoplasty (nasal surgery performed after skeletal maturity) was performed in 46 patients (57%). The rates of these mature procedures were remarkably consistent, occurring in 58% of unilateral clefts and 55% of bilateral clefts. This high rate of mature intervention reflects the standard clinical practice of addressing final nasal aesthetics and airway function once the underlying skeletal framework has stabilized. Furthermore, the researchers tracked the long-term durability of these adult reconstructions, noting that nasal revision following a primary mature rhinoplasty was performed in 8 patients (10%). For practicing surgeons, these findings provide a clear timeline for patient counseling, emphasizing that while early nasal surgery is rare following nasoalveolar molding, the majority of patients will undergo a single definitive procedure upon reaching skeletal maturity.

Clinical Implications for Surgical Planning

The longitudinal data confirms that nasoalveolar molding serves as a highly effective adjunct to primary surgical management. By optimizing the initial anatomical relationship of the lip and nose, the technique minimizes the need for early secondary interventions. The observation that only 3 patients (3.7%) required lip revision prior to reaching facial maturity directly supports the clinical goal of reducing the cumulative operative burden during childhood and adolescence. This low rate of early revision allows clinicians to defer definitive corrections until skeletal growth is complete, avoiding the complications and psychological stress associated with operating on actively growing tissues. Ultimately, the study concludes that nasoalveolar molding is an effective adjunct in reducing the burden of operative revisions as patients reach facial maturity, particularly for bilateral clefts. While the total rate of lip revision over the two-decade period was 44% (36 patients), the stability provided by the initial molding process meant that the majority of these procedures could be performed under more stable physiological conditions in adulthood. For patients with bilateral clefts, who often face more complex reconstructive challenges, the use of nasoalveolar molding helped maintain results that were statistically comparable to unilateral cases. Specifically, lip revision rates showed no significant difference between bilateral and unilateral clefts (48% versus 37.9%, p=0.38). For the practicing reconstructive surgeon, these findings validate the use of presurgical molding to normalize the long-term surgical trajectory, even for the most severe cleft presentations.

References

1. Bayan L, Nordahl E, Huynh K, et al. Grayson's Technique for Presurgical Nasoalveolar Molding (PNAM) in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis.. The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. 2025. doi:10.1177/10556656251395936

2. Moon C, Nam I, An H, Hwang J, Sim S, Hwang D. Comparative Analysis of Soft and Hard Tissue Outcomes Following Nasoalveolar Molding in Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review.. The Journal of craniofacial surgery. 2025. doi:10.1097/SCS.0000000000011476

3. Velickovic A, Rossouw PE, Javed F. Effectiveness of digitally- versus conventionally-fabricated nasoalveolar molding appliances for presurgical approximation of complete cleft lip and palate: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.. Journal of stomatology, oral and maxillofacial surgery. 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jormas.2026.102796

4. Padovano W, Skolnick GB, Naidoo SD, Snyder‐Warwick AK, Patel KB. Long-Term Effects of Nasoalveolar Molding in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. 2021. doi:10.1177/10556656211009702

5. Moshal T, Roohani I, Jolibois M, et al. The Impact of Presurgical Nasoalveolar Molding on Midface Growth in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. 2025. doi:10.1177/10556656241286386

6. Khandelwal M, Sennimalai K, Kharbanda OP, John D. Long-term effects of nasoalveolar molding in non-syndromic bilateral cleft lip and palate patients: a systematic review protocol.. JBI evidence synthesis. 2026. doi:10.11124/JBIES-24-00487

7. Thierens L, Brusselaers N, Roo ND, Pauw GD. Effects of labial adhesion on maxillary arch dimensions and nasolabial esthetics in cleft lip and palate: a systematic review. Oral Diseases. 2016. doi:10.1111/odi.12613

8. Souza TMD, Refaxo NDA, Macari S, Abreu LG. Nasal Symmetry Outcomes After Nasoalveolar Molding (NAM) Plus Cheiloplasty Treatment in Babies With Cleft Lip/Palate: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association. 2025. doi:10.1177/10556656251346368