Can surgeons rely on growth-related changes to achieve lip height and width symmetry in unilateral complete cleft lip repair?

Surgeons face difficulties achieving simultaneous lip height and width symmetry while repairing unilateral complete cleft lip, so one is often sacrificed at the expense of the other. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of growth on lip height and width symmetry, to guide the surgeon to the best decision. The study patients (N = 105) were divided into two groups based on the treatment method: 42 were treated with the modified rotational advancement technique (MRA group) and 63 with the Millard rotation-advancement technique (RA group). Furthermore, based on lip height and width symmetry at 6 months postoperative, the patients were divided into three groups: 38 with symmetrical lip height and width (SL), 41 with horizontal lip width more symmetrical than lip height (RAW), and 26 with vertical lip height more symmetrical than lip width (RAH). Measurements were taken preoperatively (T0), 6 months (T1) and 5 years (T2) postoperatively. The MRA group had significantly more symmetrical lip height than the RA group at T1 (P = 0.003) and T2 (P = 0.002); however no statistically significant difference in lip width symmetry was observed between the two groups. In relation to the effects of growth, only lip width symmetry in the RAH group improved significantly between T1 and T2 (P = 0.023). In conclusion the improvement in lip width symmetry following 5 years of postoperative growth did not achieve the same symmetry as when lip width symmetry was achieved intraoperatively. Thus, the MRA technique could be used to obtain intraoperative symmetry of lip height and width.     

‘At risk’ waist-to-height ratio cut-off points recently adopted by NICE and US Department of Defense will unfairly penalize shorter adults. What is the solution?

ObjectivesTo a) demonstrate that adopting ‘at risk’ waist-to-height ratio (WHTR) cut-off points, recently approved by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the United States Department of Defense (USDoD), will unfairly penalize shorter individuals and will be too lenient for taller individuals, b) to confirm that waist circumference (WC) of a sample of US service personnel, scales to approximately height^0.5, supporting the notion that WC, to be independent of height (HT), should be normalized using WC.HT^?0.5 (WHT?5R), and c) to identify the WHT?5R cut-off points that will reduce or eliminate this unwanted bias.Subjects/methodsWe employed a three independent cross-sectional sample design. All n = 58,742 participants underwent anthropometric assessment of body mass, stature and waist circumference.ResultsThe allometric power-law model WC=a.HT^b for US service personnel identified the height exponent to be b= 0.418 (95 % CI 0.251–0.585), confirming that the simple body-shape index for WC to be independent of HT, should be WC.HT^?0.5. Chi-square tests of independence and for linear trend confirmed that by adopting WHTR cut-off point, shorter individuals (both service personnel and non-service participants) will be over penalized (classified as being ‘at risk’). New WC independent-of-height ratio cut-off points were found to resolve this problem.ConclusionsAdopting WHTR cut-off thresholds (either 0.5 or 0.55) will lead to shorter adults being unfairly classified as being ‘at risk’ in terms of their central adiposity and general health status. Adopting new WHT?5R cut-off point thresholds were found to greatly reduce or eliminate this bias.