The purpose of this study was to quantitatively assess dentoalveolar and skeletal compensations in patients with untreated unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). We hypothesized that there are significant skeletal and dental adaptations in UCLP cases compared to a comparison maxillary crossbite group.
Design:
A convenience retrospective sample of 30 patients with UCLP and a comparison group of 30 patients with unilateral posterior crossbite without CLP. Cone-beam computed tomography scans (CBCTs) were used to evaluate dental and skeletal compensations. In addition, alveolar bone thickness was measured at 2-mm increments in mesiodistal and faciolingual cross-sectional views along the long axis of the central incisors. Alveolar bone height was measured, and the percentage of root length supported by bone was calculated.
Results:
Compensations for unilateral cleft lip and palate were restricted to the cleft site and adjacent structures. Dental compensations include alteration in the position of cleft-adjacent maxillary incisors and maxillary canines. No gross skeletal compensations were found. Alveolar support of cleft adjacent incisors was similar to controls except for measurements in the most coronal and apical regions. The cleft group contralateral incisors exhibited buttressing effects and had significantly higher alveolar thickness in the coronal half of the tooth. There was less (5%) alveolar coverage of the cleft-facing aspect of the central incisor root than all other incisors.
Conclusion:
The bone adaptation to the presence of a cleft was localized in the vicinity of the cleft, and adaptations in the mandible were not apparent.
AburezqHDaskalogiannakisJForrestC. Management of the prominent premaxilla in bilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43:92–95.
2.
AlbuquerqueMGaiaBCavalcantiM. Oral cleft volumetric assessment by 3D multislice computed tomographic images. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;40:1280–1288.
3.
AndersenHMatthiessenM. Histochemistry of the early development of the human central face and nasal cavity with special reference to the movements and fusion of the palatine processes. Cells Tissues Organs. 1967;68:473–508.
4.
BisharaSEKrauseCJOlinWWestonDNessJFellingC. Facial and dental relationships of individuals with unoperated clefts of the lip and/or palate. Cleft Palate J. 1976;13:238–252.
5.
BouvierMHylanderWL. Effect of bone strain on cortical bone structure in macaques (Macaca mulatta). J Morphol. 1981;167:1–12.
6.
BoyarskiySChoiHJParkK. Evaluation of alveolar bone support of the permanent canine in cleft and noncleft patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43:678–682.
7.
BräggerUNymanSLangNWyttenbachTSalviGSchürchE. The significance of alveolar bone in periodontal disease. J Clin Periodontol. 1990;17:379–384.
8.
BräggerUSchürchEGusbertiFLangN. Periodontal conditions in adolescents with cleft lip, alveolus and palate following treatment in a co-ordinated team approach. J Clin Periodontol. 1985;12:494–502.
9.
BräggerUSchürchEJrSalviGvon WyttenbachTLangNP. Periodontal conditions in adult patients with cleft lip, alveolus, and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992;29:179–185.
10.
BuyukSKErcanECelikogluMSekerciAEHatipogluM. Evaluation of dehiscence and fenestration in adolescent patients affected by unilateral cleft lip and palate: a retrospective cone beam computed tomography study. Angle Orthod. 2016;86:431–436.
11.
CapelozzaFLDe AlmeidaAUrsiW. Rapid maxillary expansion in cleft lip and palate patients. J Clin Orthod. 1994;28:34–39.
12.
de MouraPMHallacRKaneASeawardJ. Improving the evaluation of alveolar bone grafts with cone beam computerized tomography. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016;53:57–63.
13.
ErcanECelikogluMBuyukSKSekerciAE. Assessment of the alveolar bone support of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Angle Orthod. 2015;85:1003–1008.
14.
EricssonIThilanderBLindheJ. Periodontal conditions after orthodontic tooth movements in the dog. Angle Orthod. 1978;48:210–218.
15.
FriedeHMöllerMLiljaJLauritzenCJohansonB. Facial morphology and occlusion at the stage of early mixed dentition in cleft lip and palate patients treated with delayed closure of the hard palate. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1987;21:65–71.
16.
GaribDGYatabeMSOzawaTOda Silva FilhoOG. Alveolar bone morphology in patients with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate in the mixed dentition: cone beam computed tomography evaluation. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49:208–214.
17.
HeidbuchelKLKuijpers-JagtmanAMFreihoferHPM. An orthodontic and cephalometric study on the results of the combined surgical-orthodontic approach of the protruded premaxilla in bilateral clefts. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1993;21:60–66.
18.
HylanderWLJohnsonKR. In vivo bone strain patterns in the zygomatic arch of macaques and the significance of these patterns for functional interpretations of craniofacial form. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1997;102:203–232.
19.
IsaacsonRJMurphyTD. Some effects of rapid maxillary expansion in cleft lip and palate patients. Angle Orthod. 1964;34:143–154.
20.
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.
21.
KapilaSNervinaJ. CBCT in orthodontics: assessment of treatment outcomes and indications for its use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014;44:20140282.
22.
KyrkanidesSKlambaniMDaniel SubtelnyJ. Cranial base and facial skeleton asymmetries in individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2000;37:556–561.
23.
KyrkanidesSRichterL. Mandibular asymmetry and antigonial notching in individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002;39:30–35.
24.
LasposCPKyrkanidesSTallentsRHMossMESubtelnyJD. Mandibular asymmetry in noncleft and unilateral cleft lip and palate individuals. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997;34:410–416.
25.
MercadoAMVigKWL. The orthodontist’s role in a cleft palate-craniofacial team. In: GraberLWVanarsdallRLJrVigKWL, eds. Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques. ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016.
26.
MischKAYiESSarmentDP. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements. J Periodontol. 2006;77:1261–1266.
27.
OberoiSChigurupatiRGillPHoffmanWYVargervikK. Volumetric assessment of secondary alveolar bone grafting using cone beam computed tomography. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009;46:503–511.
28.
PrydsøUHolmPCADahlEFogh-AndersenP. Bone formation in palatal clefts subsequent to palato-vomer plasty: influence on transverse maxillary growth. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1974;8:73–78.
29.
QuereshyFABarnumGDemkoCHoranMPalomoJMBaurDAJannuzziJ. Use of cone beam computed tomography to volumetrically assess alveolar cleft defects—preliminary results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70:188–191.
30.
QuirynenMDe SoeteMDierickxKVan SteenbergheD. The intra-oral translocation of periodontopathogens jeopardises the outcome of periodontal therapy. J Clin Periodontol. 2001;28:499–507.
31.
RaffertyKLHerringSW. Craniofacial sutures: morphology, growth, and in vivo masticatory strains. J Morphol. 1999;242:167.
32.
RosensteinSWLongREJrDadoDVVinsonBAlderME. Comparison of 2-D calculations from periapical and occlusal radiographs versus 3-D calculations from CAT scans in determining bone support for cleft-adjacent teeth following early alveolar bone grafts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997;34:199–205.
33.
SchultesGGagglAKärcherH. Comparison of periodontal disease in patients with clefts of palate and patients with unilateral clefts of lip, palate, and alveolus. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999;36:322–327.
34.
ShirotaTKurabayashiHOguraHSekiKMakiKShintaniS. Analysis of bone volume using computer simulation system for secondary bone graft in alveolar cleft. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39:904–908.
35.
StecMSzczepanskaJPypecJHirschfelderU. Periodontal status and oral hygiene in two populations of cleft patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2007;44:73–78.
36.
SunZSmithTKortamSKimDGTeeBCFieldsH. Effect of bone thickness on alveolar bone-height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139:e117–e127.
37.
TejaZPerssonROmnellML. Periodontal status of teeth adjacent to nongrafted unilateral alveolar clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1992;29:357–362.
38.
TengSHerringSW. Compressive loading on bone surfaces from muscular contraction: an in vivo study in the miniature pig, Sus scrofa. J Morphol. 1998;238:71–80.
39.
WoodRSunZChaudhryJTeeBCKimDGLeblebiciogluBEnglandG. Factors affecting the accuracy of buccal alveolar bone height measurements from cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;143:353–363.
40.
WörtcheRHassfeldSLuxCMüssigEHensleyFWKrempienRHofeleC. Clinical application of cone beam digital volume tomography in children with cleft lip and palate. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:88–94.
41.
YatabeMSOzawaTOJansonGFacoRAGaribDG. Are there bone dehiscences in maxillary canines orthodontically moved into the grafted alveolar cleft?Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147:205–213.
42.
ZachrissonBUAlnaesL. Periodontal condition in orthodontically treated and untreated individuals II. Alveolar bone loss: radiographic findings. Angle Orthod. 1974;44:48–55.
