Eymi Valery Cazas Duran de Gittins1, Renato Yassutaka Faria Yaedú1, José Roberto Pereira Lauris2, Cassia Maria Fischer Rubira1, Bruna Stuchi Centurion Pagin3, Izabel Regina Fischer Rubira-Bullen4. 1. Department of Surgery, Stomatology, Pathology and Radiology, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Al. Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75; CEP: 17.012-901, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil. 2. Department of Public Health, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Area Oral Diagnosis, Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies(HRAC), University of São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil. 4. Department of Surgery, Stomatology, Pathology and Radiology, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Al. Dr. Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75; CEP: 17.012-901, Bauru, São Paulo, Brazil. izrubira@fob.usp.br.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the posterior superior alveolar canal (PSAC) in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) as compared to patients with no cleft lip and palate (NC) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter study based on two steps: (1) evaluating intra- and inter-calibration and (2) detecting the presence or absence of PSAC and its location, diameter, and anastomosis with anterior superior alveolar canal. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients were selected for the study, out of which 150 were categorized as CLP (75 men, 75 women; mean age: 29.8 years) and 150 were categorized as NC (75 men, 75 women; mean age: 40.3 years). PSAC in patients with CLP and NC was visible in 100% of the cases, in men and women, bilaterally. PSAC location in CLP was middle and upper third of the maxillary sinus as compared to NC (lower third) (chi-squared < 0.001). PSAC mean diameter in CLP was 1.12 mm. It was larger compared to 0.6 mm in NC (t-test < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: PSAC location in patients with CLP was predominantly in the middle and upper third of the maxillary sinus, compared with NC. PSAC mean diameter in CLP was 1.12 mm. It was larger compared to that of 0.6 mm in NC. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These anatomical variations in CLP are important and should be acknowledged by surgeons for the following reasons: (1) to perform pre-surgical planning, (2) to avoid bleeding, and (3) to avoid neurosensory alterations.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the posterior superior alveolar canal (PSAC) in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) as compared to patients with no cleft lip and palate (NC) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter study based on two steps: (1) evaluating intra- and inter-calibration and (2) detecting the presence or absence of PSAC and its location, diameter, and anastomosis with anterior superior alveolar canal. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients were selected for the study, out of which 150 were categorized as CLP (75 men, 75 women; mean age: 29.8 years) and 150 were categorized as NC (75 men, 75 women; mean age: 40.3 years). PSAC in patients with CLP and NC was visible in 100% of the cases, in men and women, bilaterally. PSAC location in CLP was middle and upper third of the maxillary sinus as compared to NC (lower third) (chi-squared < 0.001). PSAC mean diameter in CLP was 1.12 mm. It was larger compared to 0.6 mm in NC (t-test < 0.0001). CONCLUSION:PSAC location in patients with CLP was predominantly in the middle and upper third of the maxillary sinus, compared with NC. PSAC mean diameter in CLP was 1.12 mm. It was larger compared to that of 0.6 mm in NC. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These anatomical variations in CLP are important and should be acknowledged by surgeons for the following reasons: (1) to perform pre-surgical planning, (2) to avoid bleeding, and (3) to avoid neurosensory alterations.
Authors: P Varela-Centelles; M Loira-Gago; J M Seoane-Romero; B Takkouche; L Monteiro; J Seoane Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2015-07-26 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Nicolas Elian; Stephan Wallace; Sang-Choon Cho; Ziad N Jalbout; Stuart Froum Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants Date: 2005 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.804