T P Tsai1, C S Huang, C C Huang, L C See. 1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. tptsai@cguaplo.cgu.edu.tw
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the distribution patterns of primary and permanent teeth in the cleft area and the numerical variation in teeth in unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCLP) patients. DESIGN: A survey of the dentition in UCLP patients. SETTING: Craniofacial Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. PATIENTS: 137 UCLP patients who met the following criteria: (1) have had at least one panoramic film taken, (2) the first panoramic film illustrates either primary or early mixed dentition. Evaluation of both permanent and primary dentition was available in 91 cases. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two evaluators performed independent evaluations of number and distribution of teeth in UCLP patients. The hypothesis that there are two odontogenic origins for maxillary lateral incisors was proposed to explain the occurrence of distribution patterns of dentition in the cleft area and to explain differences between primary and permanent dentition in UCLP patients. RESULTS: Four distribution patterns in the cleft area were identified in both the primary and the permanent dentition. In the primary dentition, placement of the lateral incisor distal to the alveolar cleft was the predominant pattern (pattern y, 82.4%), followed by absence of the cleft side maxillary lateral incisor (pattern ab, 9.9%), presence of one tooth on each side of the alveolar cleft (pattern xy, 5.5%), and placement of the lateral incisor mesial to the alveolar cleft (pattern x, 2.2%). In the permanent dentition, the most common pattern was the absence of the maxillary lateral incisor on the cleft side (pattern AB, 51.8%), followed by lateral incisor placement distal to the alveolar cleft (pattern Y, 46%), lateral incisor placement mesial to the alveolar cleft (pattern X, 1.5%) and the presence of one tooth on each side of the alveolar cleft (pattern XY, 0.7%). The discrepancy between the distribution patterns of primary dentition and permanent dentition successors is 57.1%. Variations in tooth number in both primary and permanent dentition of UCLP patients occurred most often in the cleft area. Abnormalities in the number of teeth (hypodontia or hyperdontia) outside the cleft area were more common in the permanent dentition than in the primary dentition (24.1% versus 4.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Four distribution patterns in the cleft area were identified in both sets of dentition. Our findings of distribution patterns in UCLP patients support the hypothesis that there may be two odontogenic origins for maxillary lateral incisors. Clinicians involved in managing the dentition of UCLP patients should consider the high frequency of numerical variation both in and outside the cleft area before starting dental treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the distribution patterns of primary and permanent teeth in the cleft area and the numerical variation in teeth in unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCLP) patients. DESIGN: A survey of the dentition in UCLP patients. SETTING: Craniofacial Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. PATIENTS: 137 UCLP patients who met the following criteria: (1) have had at least one panoramic film taken, (2) the first panoramic film illustrates either primary or early mixed dentition. Evaluation of both permanent and primary dentition was available in 91 cases. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two evaluators performed independent evaluations of number and distribution of teeth in UCLP patients. The hypothesis that there are two odontogenic origins for maxillary lateral incisors was proposed to explain the occurrence of distribution patterns of dentition in the cleft area and to explain differences between primary and permanent dentition in UCLP patients. RESULTS: Four distribution patterns in the cleft area were identified in both the primary and the permanent dentition. In the primary dentition, placement of the lateral incisor distal to the alveolar cleft was the predominant pattern (pattern y, 82.4%), followed by absence of the cleft side maxillary lateral incisor (pattern ab, 9.9%), presence of one tooth on each side of the alveolar cleft (pattern xy, 5.5%), and placement of the lateral incisor mesial to the alveolar cleft (pattern x, 2.2%). In the permanent dentition, the most common pattern was the absence of the maxillary lateral incisor on the cleft side (pattern AB, 51.8%), followed by lateral incisor placement distal to the alveolar cleft (pattern Y, 46%), lateral incisor placement mesial to the alveolar cleft (pattern X, 1.5%) and the presence of one tooth on each side of the alveolar cleft (pattern XY, 0.7%). The discrepancy between the distribution patterns of primary dentition and permanent dentition successors is 57.1%. Variations in tooth number in both primary and permanent dentition of UCLP patients occurred most often in the cleft area. Abnormalities in the number of teeth (hypodontia or hyperdontia) outside the cleft area were more common in the permanent dentition than in the primary dentition (24.1% versus 4.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Four distribution patterns in the cleft area were identified in both sets of dentition. Our findings of distribution patterns in UCLP patients support the hypothesis that there may be two odontogenic origins for maxillary lateral incisors. Clinicians involved in managing the dentition of UCLP patients should consider the high frequency of numerical variation both in and outside the cleft area before starting dental treatment.
Authors: Atsushi Ohazama; Thantrira Porntaveetus; Masato S Ota; Joachim Herz; Paul T Sharpe Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Rebecca L Slayton; Laura Williams; Jeffrey C Murray; James J Wheeler; Andrew C Lidral; Carla J Nishimura Journal: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Date: 2003-05
Authors: B J Howe; M E Cooper; A R Vieira; S M Weinberg; J M Resick; N L Nidey; G L Wehby; M L Marazita; L M Moreno Uribe Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 8.924