| Literature DB >> 26923345 |
Fatima Jabbari1, Erika Reiser1, Andreas Thor1, Malin Hakelius2, Daniel Nowinski2.
Abstract
Objective To determine in individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate the correlation between initial cleft size and dental anomalies, and the outcome of alveolar bone grafting. Methods A total of 67 consecutive patients with non-syndromic unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCLP) were included from the cleft lip and palate-craniofacial center, Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden. All patients were operated by the same surgeon and treated according to the Uppsala protocol entailing: lip plasty at 3 months, soft palate closure at 6 months, closure of the residual cleft in the hard palate at 2 years of age, and secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) prior to the eruption of the permanent canine. Cleft size was measured on dental casts obtained at the time of primary lip plasty. Dental anomalies were registered on radiographs and dental casts obtained before bone grafting. Alveolar bone height was evaluated with the Modified Bergland Index (mBI) at 1 and 10-year follow-up. Results Anterior cleft width correlated positively with enamel hypoplasia and rotation of the central incisor adjacent to the cleft. There was, however, no correlation between initial cleft width and alveolar bone height at either 1 or 10 years follow-up. Conclusions Wider clefts did not seem to have an impact on the success of secondary alveolar bone grafting but appeared to be associated with a higher degree of some dental anomalies. This finding may have implications for patient counseling and treatment planning.Entities:
Keywords: Dental status; initial cleft size; unilateral cleft lip and palate
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26923345 PMCID: PMC4812055 DOI: 10.3109/03009734.2015.1134733
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ups J Med Sci ISSN: 0300-9734 Impact factor: 2.384
Figure 1.Schematic drawing of an infant maxillary dental cast with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Landmarks and distances used in the linear measurements are demonstrated. D–E = cleft width at the level of the alveolar processes anteriorly; D–E1 = smallest cleft width at the level of the alveolar processes anteriorly; T–T1 = posterior width of the alveolar arch in the tuber area; A–A1 = width of the cleft at the level of T–T1; B–B1 = width of the cleft at the level of C–C1; B–B1/C–C1 = ratio of the cleft width related to the total alveolar arch width anteriorly at the level of the canine points; A–A1/T–T1 = ratio of the cleft width related to the total alveolar arch width posteriorly at the level of the tuberosity points.
Descriptive statistics with mean, standard deviation, minimum, median, and maximum for: cleft size measurements in millimeters (mm), cleft size ratios, degrees of dental anomalies, and modified Bergland Index.
| Variable | Mean | SD | Minimum | Median | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incisor inclination | 67 | 37.09 | 13.00 | 0.00 | 40.00 | 70.00 |
| Incisor rotation | 67 | 60.82 | 29.27 | 0.00 | 45.00 | 90.00 |
| Modified Bergland grade 1–4 | 67 | 1.03 | 0.17 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Enamel hypoplasia | 67 | 1.06 | 0.83 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Canine inclination | 67 | 1.12 | 0.64 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Modified Bergland Index at 10-year follow-up | 67 | 1.58 | 0.53 | 1.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 |
| D–E | 66 | 6.40 | 2.68 | 1.20 | 6.22 | 11.83 |
| D–E1 | 66 | 3.10 | 2.58 | 0.00 | 2.41 | 10.31 |
| C–C1 | 66 | 25.18 | 2.87 | 18.99 | 24.62 | 33.83 |
| B–B1 | 66 | 6.49 | 2.65 | 1.37 | 6.26 | 15.06 |
| BB1–CC1 | 66 | 0.25 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.26 | 0.47 |
| T–T1 | 66 | 30.39 | 2.82 | 24.56 | 30.10 | 36.94 |
| A–A1 | 66 | 7.61 | 2.45 | 3.11 | 7.56 | 13.20 |
| AA1–TT1 | 66 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.25 | 0.37 |
Spearman correlation between initial cleft width and alveolar bone height.
| Modified Bergland at 10-year follow-up | Modified Bergland grade 1–4 | |
|---|---|---|
| AA1–TT1 | 0.05509 | –0.19858 |
| 0.6604 | 0.1099 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| A–A1 | 0.11919 | –0.20509 |
| 0.3405 | 0.0985 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| BB1–CC1 | 0.21202 | –0.12045 |
| 0.0874 | 0.3354 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| B–B1 | 0.18771 | –0.15301 |
| 0.1312 | 0.2200 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| C–C1 | 0.09007 | –0.17906 |
| 0.4720 | 0.1503 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| D–E | 0.18749 | 0.04558 |
| 0.1317 | 0.7163 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| D–E1 | 0.09605 | –0.15301 |
| 0.4430 | 0.2200 | |
| 66 | 66 | |
| T–T1 | 0.15272 | –0.10093 |
| 0.2209 | 0.4201 | |
| 66 | 66 |
Figure 2.Enamel hypoplasia of the central incisor in the cleft area versus relative anterior cleft width (B–B ratio = B–B1/C–C1) as measured on dental casts obtained in connection to the primary lip plasty.
Figure 3.Rotation of the central incisor (degrees) in the cleft area versus relative anterior cleft width (B–B ratio = B–B1/C–C1) as measured on dental casts obtained in connection to the primary lip plasty.
Figure 4.Rotation of the central incisor (degrees) in the cleft area versus cleft width at the level of the alveolar processes anteriorly D–E (mm).
Figure 5.Rotation of the central incisor (degrees) in the cleft area versus smallest cleft width at the level of the alveolar processes anteriorly D–E1 (mm).