Asymmetry and Positioning of the Levator Veli Palatini Muscle in Children with Repaired Cleft Palate

• Published in: Journal of speech, language, and hearing research Vol. 63; no. 5; pp. 1317 - 1325
• Main Authors: Kotlarek, Katelyn J, Pelland, Catherine M, Blemker, Silvia S, Jaskolka, Michael S, Fang, Xiangming, Perry, Jamie L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 01.05.2020
• Subjects: Adults; Age; Anatomy; Asymmetry; Birth defects; Children; Cleft palate; Congenital Impairments; Control Groups; Human Body; Magnetic resonance imaging; Morphology; Mouth; Muscles; Orofacial clefts; Population; Speech; Speech physiology; Surgery; Symmetry; Velopharyngeal insufficiency
• ISSN: 1092-4388; 1558-9102
• DOI: 10.1044/2020_JSLHR-19-00240

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in velopharyngeal dimensions as well as levator veli palatini (levator) muscle morphology, positioning, and symmetry of children with repaired cleft palate with velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI), children with repaired cleft palate with complete velopharyngeal closure, and children with noncleft anatomy. Method: Fifteen children ranging in age from 4 to 8 years were recruited for this study. Ten of the participants had a history of repaired cleft palate, half with documented VPI and the other half with velopharyngeal closure. Five participants with noncleft anatomy were matched for age from a normative database. The magnetic resonance imaging protocol, processing methods, and analysis are consistent with that used in previous literature. Results: Regarding velopharyngeal dimensions, median values were statistically significantly different between groups for sagittal angle (p = 0.031) and effective velopharyngeal ratio (p = 0.013). With respect to the levator muscle, median values were statistically significant for average extravelar length (p = 0.018), thickness at midline (p = 0.021), and thickness between the left and right muscle bundles at the point of insertion into the velum (p = 0.037). Remaining measures were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The levator muscle is significantly different among these three groups with respect to thickness at midline, extravelar length, and symmetry at the point of insertion into the velum. Sagittal angle and effective velopharyngeal ratio are also significantly different. Participants with repaired cleft palate and VPI displayed the greatest degree of asymmetry. Future research should control for surgical procedure type to determine the impact of surgery on the levator muscle and surrounding velopharyngeal anatomy.