{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02795425667090216, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008894536213468869, 'mean_word_length': 4.924812030075188, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Late results following different methods of cleft lip repair.

This is a review of the cleft lip repair of 232 patients. Three groups were compared, one repaired according to the Hagedorn-Le Mesurier-Steffensen technique, another by the Tennison method and a third using the Pfeifer wave-line procedure. Muscular union was best following Pfeifer's wave-line procedure. Both the Hagedorn-Le Mesurier-Steffensen and the Tennison lips were often too long, while the Pfeifer lips were more often too short. Reconstruction of Cupid's bow was somewhat more harmonious following Tennison's method. There was a trend towards fewer disturbing scars with the Pfeifer's procedure. We feel that these findings support our 1970 decision to operate all cleft lips according to the wave-line procedure.