The main goal of cleft palate repair is to restore normal speech function to the patient, while the possible negative effects of surgery on maxillary growth and development must be taken into account. In addition to a multidisciplinary sequence of pre- and postoperative treatment to prevent and mitigate the adverse effects of cleft palate itself and surgery, different surgical repair modalities or procedures have been developed to effectively mitigate and avoid negative factors and achieve therapeutic goals, and have been widely used and summarized worldwide, with many successful examples. The first repair model (the surgical model adopted by most of the doctors in our department): simultaneous repair of hard and soft palate cleft is a common surgical repair model at home and abroad. Its advantages are self-evident, except that the operation is slightly complicated but not difficult to master, it saves time, effort and economic cost, and is conducive to voice recovery and correction. The one-time closure of the gap between the oral and nasal cavities is easily accepted by patients and their families, and is especially suitable for our national conditions. But along with this mode of repair, the patient pays a great price after surgery, in order to close the hard and soft palate cleft in one go, only at the expense and anatomical separation of all the anatomical structures that can make the soft and hard palate mucoperiosteal flaps on both sides move to the midline. Now a large number of clinical cases and experimental studies have confirmed that the extensive separation between the posterior maxillary tubercle and the medial pterygoid plate, the exposed bone surface left on the hard palate, the chiseled pterygoid hook, and the tissue trauma left on the nasal mucosa can seriously inhibit the growth and development of the maxilla after surgery, and the secondary development of the middle part of the face, the bite disorder, the anterior and posterior teeth, and the relative protrusion of the lower jaw, and the degree of deformity is directly related to the degree and scope of the above operations. The degree of deformity was positively correlated with the extent and scope of the above mentioned operations. At the same time, although the surgery was performed at the same time, it was difficult to lengthen the soft palate due to the wide cleft palate, and in order to lengthen the soft palate, it was sometimes necessary to leave part of the cleft in the anterior part of the hard palate that could not be repaired, i.e., the so-called “backward but not forward” repair principle, which made it difficult to restore the normal speech function of this part of the child. These irreversible secondary deformities do not occur immediately after cleft palate repair, but are a slow and lifelong process, so the patients and their families are the ones who really suffer from this pain and psychological torture. Therefore, how to improve the success rate of the surgery while effectively preventing and reducing long-term complications is a topic worthy of in-depth study by clinicians. Therefore, this repair mode is most suitable for children whose cleft has been significantly narrowed by pre-surgical orthodontic treatment; and for patients in the older age group who have missed the best time for surgery. The second repair mode: repairing the hard palate first and then the soft palate (the surgical mode being used by our medical team): this repair mode is designed to lengthen the length of the soft palate as the main goal of cleft palate repair, while taking into account the complete repair of the hard palate. During simultaneous repair of the hard and soft palate, the clinician often has to “take care of the back but not the front”, lengthening the soft palate and leaving the hard palate incompletely closed, which not only affects the retraction of the soft palate, but also leaves a large exposed bone surface after the retraction of the mucoperiosteal flap of the hard palate. From the comparative analysis of preoperative deformity and postoperative results, we also found that patients with complete cleft palate are more likely to have a short soft palate, poor speech, and inhibited maxillary growth and development than patients with incomplete cleft palate. Therefore, it is important to change complete cleft palate to incomplete cleft palate in advance to reduce the complexity of cleft palate surgery, reduce the scope of anatomical separation, and lengthen the soft palate more effectively. The reduction of factors that inhibit the growth of the maxilla is an advantage of this repair modality. The indications for this modality remain in cases where the hard palate gap has been narrowed after preoperative orthodontic treatment or cleft lip repair. The surgery is performed in two phases: the first phase is performed at the same time as the cleft lip repair, while the second phase is performed 6 months to 1 year after the first phase, but the second phase should still be completed within 2 years of age. In the first stage of surgery, the pear bone mucoperiosteal flap is used as the tip of the hard palate, and the pear bone is turned up along the hard palate side of the junction between the pear bone and the hard palate, from the posterior edge of the hard palate forward to the cleft edge of the alveolar process, while the hard palate is dissected along the cleft edge of the affected side and the hard palate mucoperiosteal flap is subconsciously separated at least 5 mm wide. The pear bone mucoperiosteal flap is then turned toward the affected side, embedded in the deep surface of the separated hard palate mucoperiosteal flap at the affected cleft margin, and sutured. If necessary, a lingual flap can be designed from the oral vestibule to cover the pearly mucoperiosteal flap in the alveolar process area, forming a double layer to close the alveolar process. For bilateral cleft palate, an incision should be made from the lower edge of the pear bone, and the mucoperiosteal flap of the pear bone on both sides should be embedded and sutured with the mucoperiosteal flap of the cleft edge of the hard palate on both sides. Clinical and experimental studies have demonstrated that this procedure does not significantly affect the growth and development of the maxilla. However, it changed the complete cleft palate into an incomplete cleft palate, creating conditions for the second stage surgery to lengthen the soft palate and reduce the impact on maxillary growth and development. The second surgical approach: according to the change of the soft palate cleft after the closure of the hard palate cleft in the first stage, the incomplete cleft palate repair in the first repair mode (simultaneous repair of the hard and soft cleft palate) can be chosen.