# Does Palatoplasty in Patients with Cleft Palate Really Improve Otitis Media with Effusion?

## TL;DR

This study examines whether palatoplasty surgery improves otitis media with effusion in cleft palate patients, finding a generally good prognosis but no clear link to velopharyngeal function improvement.

## Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence on the relationship between palatoplasty and OME improvement in cleft palate patients.

## Key findings

- Most patients showed a good prognosis for OME at 36 months post-surgery.
- Improvement in velopharyngeal function was not significantly linked to OME recurrence.
- Other OME risk factors did not clearly predict OME recurrence.

## Abstract

Background: The majority of cleft palate patients have been reported to suffer from otitis media with effusion (OME). The improvement of velopharyngeal function (VPF) after palatoplasty might be evidence for the improvement of the function of the Eustachian tube. The improvement of the function of Eustachian tube by palatoplasty has been reported to be effective for the treatment of OME simultaneously with the insertion of a ventilation tube into the tympanic membrane. There are only a few reports that clearly show the association between improvement of VPF and improvement of OME after palatoplasty. In this study, we discussed whether the improvement of VPF after palatoplasty in cleft palate patients with OME improved OME. Methods: Twenty-six patients with cleft palate were included in the study. We retrospectively extracted the information of cleft type, gender, surgical technique, and presence of OME risk factors from electronic medical records. We also investigated the recurrence of OME and the improvement level of VPF at 36 months postoperatively. OME was assessed based on the otolaryngologist’s findings in electronic medical records, with a good prognosis group with no symptom of OME, or a recurrence group with prolonged or recurrent OME. Results: At 36 months after palatoplasty, 19 of 23 patients (82.6%) were in the OME good prognosis group and four (17.4%) were in the OME recurrence group. The rate of patients with recurrent OME did not differ significantly by the degree of improvement of VPF. This study indicated that clear association between other risk factors for OME and OME recurrence could not be shown. Conclusion: We observed that most patients with cleft palate who underwent palatoplasty showed a good prognosis for OME at 36 months after surgery. However, further studies are needed to investigate the impact of different surgical techniques on the improvement of OME and the degree to which VPF improves, as well as the effect of each OME risk factor.