Research Article| Volume 46, ISSUE 1, P7-12, 1993

A panel based assessment of early versus no nasal correction of the cleft lip nose

      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.


      There is a need to be able to assess the overall result in a significant series of cases of a method of management of the cleft lip and nose deformity in order to avoid “best case” reporting often used to introduce new techniques. The present study was performed by a panel placing standardised base view photographs in rank order. The photographs were of 10-year-old subjects of whom 15 were normal controls, 22 were from the Rikshospitalet, Oslo, all of whom had no primary nasal correction and 25 from Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, who all had radical primary nasal correction.
      Ranking was performed for upper nasal perimeter symmetry, nostril outline symmetry and for overall aesthetic appearance. Analysis of the results showed a significant difference between the three groups, with the corrected noses showing better symmetry. Inter and intraobserver correlations were very close.
      The limitations of a ranking and marking method of panel assessment are discussed, and a computerised method is presented in subsequent papers.


        • Coghlan B.A.
        • Laitung J.K.G.
        • Pigott R.W.
        A computer aided method of measuring nasal symmetry in the cleft lip nose.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1993; 46: 13-17
        • Hotelling H.
        • Pabst M.R.
        Rank correlation and tests of significance involving no assumption of normality.
        The Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1936; 7: 29
        • James N.K.
        • Mercer N.S.G.
        • Peat B.
        • Pigott R.W.
        • McComb H.
        Nasal symmetry: a 10 year comparison between the Pigott and McComb nasal correction.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1991; 44: 562
        • Laitung J.K.G.
        • Coghlan B.A.
        • Pigott R.W.
        A comparison of computer versus panel assessment of two groups of patients with cleft lip and palate.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1993; 46: 18-21
        • Larson L.
        • Nilsson B.
        Early bone grafting in complete cleft lip and palate cases following maxillofacial orthopaedics. VI. Assessments from photographs and anthropometric measurements.
        Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 1983; 17: 209
        • Pigott R.W.
        Alar Leapfrog. A technique for repositioning the total alar cartilage at primary cleft lip repair.
        Clinics in Plastic Surgery. 1985; 12: 643
        • Pigott R.W.
        Aesthetic considerations related to repair of the bilateral cleft lip nasal deformity.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1988; 41: 593
        • Poole M.D.
        • Walters E.
        • Beardsworth E.
        • Griffiths P.
        Orbital dystopia: attempts to evaluate the results of surgery.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1991; 44: 81
        • Roberts-Harry D.P.
        • Stephens C.D.
        The intra and inter examiner agreement in assessing facial attractiveness from photographs.
        European Journal of Orthodontics. 1992; (in press)
        • Saxby P.J.
        • Palmer J.H.
        The use of an independent panel to assess the long term results of cleft lip repair.
        British Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1986; 39: 373
        • Siegel S.
        Non-parametric statistics for the behavioural sciences.
        in: McGraw Hill Kogakusha Ltd., Tokyo1956: 23
        • Ward C.M.
        An analysis, from photographs, of the results of four approaches to elongating the columella after repair of bilateral cleft lip.
        Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 1979; 64: 68
        • Williams H.B.
        A method of assessing cleft lip repairs: comparison of Le Mesurier and Millard techniques.
        Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 1968; 41: 103