Facial profile and maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate children in the mixed dentition stage

Vellore Kannan Gopinath; Ab Rani Samsudin; Siti Noor Fazliah Mohd Noor; Hady Youssef Mohamed Sharab

doi:10.4103/ejd.ejd_238_16

European Journal of Dentistry, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2017; 11(01): 076-082
DOI: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_238_16

Original Article

Dental Investigation Society

Facial profile and maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate children in the mixed dentition stage

Authors

Vellore Kannan Gopinath

¹Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE
Ab Rani Samsudin

¹Department of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Department of Oral and Craniofacial Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE
Siti Noor Fazliah Mohd Noor

²Department of Pediatrics Dentistry, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia
Hady Youssef Mohamed Sharab

²Department of Pediatrics Dentistry, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Malaysia

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the vertical and sagittal facial profile and maxillary arch width, depth, and length of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and to compare them with healthy noncleft children in the mixed dentition stage (7–13 years). Materials and Methods: This study is conducted at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. UCLP group comprised 48 patients with nonsyndromic UCLP who have had the lip and palate repaired, whereas the control group comprised 48 healthy noncleft cases. The lateral cephalometrics measurements were used to determine the vertical height, sagittal depth of the face, and cranial base length and angle. Maxillary arch dimensions were measured on the study cast including arch width, depth, and length. Results: Vertical facial height and sagittal depth measurements showed a significant decrease (P < 0.05) in the mean growth pattern in UCLP group. The anterior cranial base length (S-N) was shorter in UCLP children (P < 0.001), while Ba-N length had no significant difference (P = 0.639). Nasion-Sella Tursica-Basion angle was significantly higher in the UCLP group (P = 0.016). Dental arch width with reference to canine-to-canine and first premolar-to- first premolar distance was significantly larger in control (P = 0.001). Conclusion: Mean vertical and sagittal facial dimensions in the UCLP children who do not undergo orthodontic treatment are significantly lesser in all directions of growth than healthy noncleft children. The maxillary dental arch had a normal depth but constricted in width and arch length.

Key words:

Cleft lip and palate - facial profile - maxillary arch dimensions

Full Text

References

REFERENCES
1 Cura F, Böhmer AC, Klamt J, Schünke H, Scapoli L, Martinelli M. et al. Replication analysis of 15 susceptibility loci for nonsyndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate in an Italian population. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2016; 106: 81-7
2 Dental Services Division. Dental epidemiological survey of preschool children in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: MY: Ministry of Health Malaysia; 1995
3 IPDTOC Working Group. Prevalence at birth of cleft lip with or without cleft palate: Data from the International Perinatal Database of Typical Oral Clefts (IPDTOC). Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2011; 48: 66-81
4 Del Guercio F, Meazzini MC, Garattini G, Morabito A, Semb G, Brusati R. A cephalometric intercentre comparison of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate at 5 and 10 years of age. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32: 24-7
5 Heidbuchel KL, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Maxillary and mandibular dental-arch dimensions and occlusion in bilateral cleft lip and palate patients form 3 to 17 years of age. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1997; 34: 21-6
6 Trotman CA, Ross RB. Craniofacial growth in bilateral cleft lip and palate: Ages six years to adulthood. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30: 261-73
7 Silva Filho OG, Calvano F, Assunção AG, Cavassan AO.. Craniofacial morphology in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate: A comparison of two surgical protocols. Angle Orthod 2001; 71: 274-84
8 Trotman CA, Papillon F, Ross RB, McNamara Jr JA, Johnston Jr LE. A retrospective comparison of frontal facial dimensions in alveolar-bone-grafted and nongrafted unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Angle Orthod 1997; 67: 389-94
9 Athanasiou AE, Tseng CY, Zarrinnia K, Mazaheri M. Frontal cephalometric study of dentofacial morphology in children with bilateral clefts of lip, alveolus and palate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 1990; 18: 49-54
10 Athanasiou AE, Mazaheri M, Zarrinnia K. Dental arch dimensions in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 1988; 25: 139-45
11 Honda Y, Suzuki A, Ohishi M, Tashiro H. Longitudinal study on the changes of maxillary arch dimensions in Japanese children with cleft lip and/or palate: Infancy to 4 years of age. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1995; 32: 149-55
12 Dissaux C, Grollemund B, Bodin F, Picard A, Vazquez MP, Morand B. et al. Evaluation of 5-year-old children with complete cleft lip and palate: Multicenter study. Part 2: Functional results. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016; 44: 94-103
13 Sarnat BG. Some methods of assessing postnatal craniofaciodental growth: A retrospective of personal research. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1997; 34: 159-72
14 Abu Alhaija ES, Qudeimat MA. Occlusion and tooth/arch dimensions in the primary dentition of preschool Jordanian children. Int J Paediatr Dent 2003; 13: 230-9
15 Holst AI, Holst S, Nkenke E, Fenner M, Hirschfelder U. Vertical and sagittal growth in patients with unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate – A retrospective cephalometric evaluation. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2009; 46: 512-20
16 Tateishi C, Moriyama K, Takano-Yamamoto T. Dentocraniofacial morphology of 12 Japanese subjects with unilateral cleft lip and palate with a severe class III malocclusion: A cephalometric study at the pretreatment stage of surgical orthodontic treatment. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38: 597-605
17 Schultes G, Gaggl A, Kärcher H. A comparison of growth impairment and orthodontic results in adult patients with clefts of palate and unilateral clefts of lip, palate and alveolus. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000; 38: 26-32
18 Meazzini MC, Donati V, Garattini G, Brusati R. Maxillary gro+wth impairment in cleft lip and palate patients: A simplified approach in the search for a cause. J Craniofac Surg 2008; 19: 1302-7
19 Sanggarnjanavanich S, Sekiya T, Nomura Y, Nakayama T, Hanada N, Nakamura Y. Cranial-base morphology in adults with skeletal class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 146: 82-91
20 Proff P, Will F, Bokan I, Fanghänel J, Gedrange T. Cranial base features in skeletal class III patients. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 433-9
21 Garrahy A, Millett DT, Ayoub AF. Early assessment of dental arch development in repaired unilateral cleft lip and unilateral cleft lip and palate versus controls. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2005; 42: 385-91
22 Brudnicki A, Bronkhorst EM, Nada R, Dudkiewicz Z, Kaminek M, Katsaros C. et al. Nasolabial appearance after two palatoplasty types in cleft lip and palate. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014; 17: 124-31
23 Rajion ZA, Townsend GC, Netherway DJ, Anderson PJ, Hughes T, Shuaib IL. et al. The hyoid bone in Malay infants with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2006; 43: 532-8
24 Ozbek MM, Memikoglu UT, Altug-Atac AT, Lowe AA. Stability of maxillary expansion and tongue posture. Angle Orthod 2009; 79: 214-20
25 Shi B, Losee JE. The impact of cleft lip and palate repair on maxillofacial growth. Int J Oral Sci 2015; 7: 14-7
26 Graber TM. Changing philosophies in cleft palate management. J Pediatr 1950; 37: 400-15
27 Koberg W, Koblin I. Speech development and maxillary growth in relation to technique and timing of palatoplasty. J Maxillofac Surg 1973; 1: 44-50
28 Nollet PJ, Katsaros C, van't Hof MA, Semb G, Shaw WC, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Treatment outcome after two-stage palatal closure in unilateral cleft lip and palate: A comparison with Eurocleft. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2005; 42: 512-6
29 Sundareswaran S, Thirumoorty SN. Anterior cranial base features in skeletal class III patients with maxillary recession: A cephalometric study. Orthodontics (Chic.) 2012; 13: 105-15
30 Paradowska-Stolarz A, Kawala B. Measurements of mandibular length in patients with total clefts. Dev Period Med 2014; 18: 110-5
31 Sundareswaran S, Nipun CA. Glenoid fossa position in surgically repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Eur J Orthod 2015; 37: 386-90
32 Hermann NV, Darvann TA, Ersbøll BK, HKreiborg S. Short mandible – A possible risk factor for cleft palate with/without a cleft lip. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014; 17: 106-14
33 Singh GD, Rivera-Robles J, de Jesus-Vinas J. Longitudinal craniofacial growth patterns in patients with orofacial clefts: Geometric morphometrics. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2004; 41: 136-43
34 Laing E, Ashley P, Naini FB, Gill DS. Space maintenance. Int J Paediatr Dent 2009; 19: 155-62
35 Pegelow M, Alqadi N, Karsten AL. The prevalence of various dental characteristics in the primary and mixed dentition in patients born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip with or without cleft palate. Eur J Orthod 2012; 34: 561-70
36 Abd Rahman N, Abdullah N, Samsudin AR, Naing Mohd Ayub Sadiq L. Dental anomalies and facial profile abnormality of the non-syndromic cleft lip and palate children in Kelantan. Malays J Med Sci 2004; 11: 41-51
37 Jamilian A, Showkatbakhsh R, Boushehry MB. The effect of tongue appliance on the nasomaxillary complex in growing cleft lip and palate patients. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006; 24: 136-9
38 Zhang H, Deng F, Wang H, Huang Q, Zhang Y. Early orthodontic intervention followed by fixed appliance therapy in a patient with a severe Class III malocclusion and cleft lip and palate. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144: 726-36