| Literature DB >> 35096161 |
Roberta Lopes Castro Martinelli1, Irene Queiroz Marchesan2, Reinaldo Jordão Gusmão3, Giédre Berretin-Felix4.
Abstract
Introduction The tongue plays an important role in the development of craniofacial structures. At rest, the light and constant pressure of the tongue against the hard palate, counterbalanced by the pressure provided by proper lip sealing, serves as a guide for maxillary growth. Ankyloglossia makes tongue coupling against the hard palate difficult, impacting maxillary development, which may lead to breathing disorders. Objective To verify the effect of lingual frenotomy on the resting position of the tongue and lips in infants with ankyloglossia. Methods The sample consisted of 334 infants aged between 1 and 60 days old diagnosed with ankyloglossia. The groups were divided in: a) experimental group (EG), which consisted of infants whose mothers agreed with lingual frenotomy; b) control group (CG), which consisted of infants whose mothers either refused lingual frenotomy or were waiting for surgery. Both the position of the lips and of the tongue at rest were assessed while the infants were sleeping during the quiet sleep phase. For mothers who refused their infants to undergo the surgical procedure, a follow-up of the infants was proposed to verify possible interference of the frenulum with the resting position of the tongue and lips. Infants whose mothers agreed with surgery were referred for lingual frenotomy. Results Regarding the position of the tongue and lips at rest at the initial and final assessments, the statistical analysis demonstrated significant differences between both groups. Conclusion Lingual frenotomy enabled infants diagnosed with ankyloglossia to maintain both tongue coupling against the hard palate and closed lips at rest. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).Entities:
Keywords: ankyloglossia; lingual frenum; surgical procedure; tongue
Year: 2021 PMID: 35096161 PMCID: PMC8789490 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1726050
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1809-4864
Fig. 1Lip posture at rest. In A, closed, in B, half-open, and in C, open.
Fig. 2Maneuver to visualize tongue position at rest.
Fig. 3Tongue position at rest. In A, elevated, in B, elevated, but being pulled down by the lingual frenulum, and in C, down-positioned in the oral cavity.
Position of the lips at rest at the initial and final assessments of both groups of infants with ankyloglossia: the group who underwent lingual frenotomy and the group who did not undergo surgery
| Surgery | Lip position at initial assessment | Lip position at final assessment | Total |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| open | half-hopen | closed | ||||
| No (CG) | open | 11 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 0.580 |
| 12.10% | 1.10% | 0.00% | 13.20% | |||
| half-open | 3 | 45 | 5 | 53 | ||
| 3.30% | 49.50% | 5.50% | 58.20% | |||
| closed | 0 | 6 | 20 | 26 | ||
| 0.00% | 6.60% | 22.00% | 28.60% | |||
| Total | 14 | 52 | 25 | 91 | ||
| 15.40% | 57.10% | 27.50% | 100.00% | |||
| Yes (EG) | open | 0 | 0 | 14 | 14 |
< 0.001
|
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 5.80% | 5.80% | |||
| half-open | 0 | 0 | 126 | 126 | ||
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 51.90% | 51.90% | |||
| closed | 0 | 0 | 103 | 103 | ||
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 42.40% | 42.40% | |||
| Total | 0 | 0 | 243 | 243 | ||
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 100.00% | 100.00% | |||
Abbreviations: CG, control group; EG, experimental group.
McNemar test.
Statistical Significance.
Resting position of the tongue at the initial and final assessments of both groups of infants with ankyloglossia: the group who underwent lingual frenotomy and the group who did not undergo surgery
| Surgery | Tongue position at initial assessment | Tongue position at final assessment | Total |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| down-positioned | elevated | elevated pulled down | ||||
| No (CG) | down-positioned | 87 | 0 | 0 | 87 | 0,250 |
| 95.60% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 95.60% | |||
| elevated | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | |||
| elevated pulled down | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | ||
| 3.30% | 0.00% | 1.10% | 4.40% | |||
| Total | 90 | 0 | 1 | 91 | ||
| 98.90% | 0.00% | 1.10% | 100.00% | |||
| Yes (EG) | down-positioned | 3 | 211 | 0 | 214 |
< 0.001
|
| 1.20% | 86.80% | 0.00% | 88.10% | |||
| elevated | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | |||
| elevated pulled down | 0 | 29 | 0 | 29 | ||
| 0.00% | 11.90% | 0.00% | 11.90% | |||
| Total | 3 | 240 | 0 | 243 | ||
| 1.20% | 98.80% | 0.00% | 100.00% | |||
Abbreviations: CG, control group; EG, experimental group.
McNemar test.
Statistical Significance.
Comparison of tongue and lip position at rest at the initial and final assessments of both groups of infants with ankyloglossia: the group who underwent lingual frenotomy and the group who did not undergo surgery
| Variable | Category | Surgery | p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No (CG) | Yes (EG) | |||||
| Freq. | Perc. | Freq. | Perc. | |||
| Lip position at | open | 12 | 13.20% | 14 | 5.80% |
0.015
|
| half-open | 53 | 58.20% | 126 | 51.90% | ||
| closed | 26 | 28.60% | 103 | 42.40% | ||
| Tongue position at initial assessment | down-positioned | 87 | 95.60% | 214 | 88.10% |
0.040
|
| elevated pulled down | 4 | 4.40% | 29 | 11.90% | ||
| Lip position at final assessmentl | open | 14 | 15.40% | 0 | 0.00% |
< 0.001
|
| half-open | 52 | 57.10% | 0 | 0.00% | ||
| closed | 25 | 27.50% | 243 | 100.00% | ||
| Tongue position at final assessment | down-positioned | 90 | 98.90% | 3 | 1.20% |
< 0.001
|
| elevated | 0 | 0.00% | 240 | 98.80% | ||
| elevated pulled down | 1 | 1.10% | 0 | 0.00% | ||
Abbreviations: CG, control group; EG, experimental group; Freq., frequency; Perc., percentage.
Likelihood-ratio test.
Statistical Significance.