To cephalometrically compare craniofacial morphology and maxillary advancement in growing versus non-growing patients with clefts undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy.
Design
Retrospective cohort study.
Setting
All patients underwent maxillary osteotomy at a single tertiary hospital.
Patients
The Pre-Growth-Completion group (PreGC) comprised 28 growing patients (18 males, 10 females; 9 BCLP, 18 UCLP, 1 CP) with a mean age at surgery of 13.5 years (SD = 1.22; range, 11.5-16.7). The Post-Growth-Completion group (PostGC) comprised 59 patients (28 males, 31 females; 15 BCLP, 23 UCLP, 21 CP) with a mean age at surgery of 18.3 years (SD = 4.38; range, 14.5-45.3). Patients with syndromes and those undergoing bimaxillary osteotomies were excluded.
Interventions
Each patient underwent Le Fort I osteotomy. Osteotomies were fixed with patient-specific implants or miniplates.
Main Outcome Measures
Cephalometric analysis was performed comparing preoperative lateral cephalometric radiographs or CT scans and immediate postoperative lateral cephalometric radiographs.
Results
Patients in PreGC group had more severe preoperative maxillary hypoplasia (SNA 74.2° vs 77.0°, P = .007; ANB −5.2° vs −1.9°, P = .0001), but no significant differences were observed postoperatively (SNA 80.7° vs 78.9°, ANB 2.7° vs 3.9°). Maxillary horizontal advancement was greater in the PreGC group (point A 6.4 mm vs 3.2 mm; P = .00002).
Conclusions
Patients undergoing early Le Fort I osteotomy had more severe preoperative maxillary hypoplasia, required greater horizontal advancements, yet achieved significant corrections comparable to patients treated later. However, early osteotomy in growing patients may be considered a 2-stage approach as secondary correction is often required after growth is complete.
RantaR. A review of tooth formation in children with cleft lip/palate. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1986;90(1):11‐18. doi:10.1016/0889-5406(86)90022-3
2.
RizellSBellardieHKarstenASælePMooneyJHeliövaaraAKüselerABrinckESkaarePMølstedK,et al.Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: Dental anomalies in 8-year olds. Eur J Orthod. 2020;42(1):8‐14. doi:10.1093/ejo/cjz070
3.
RobertssonSMohlinB. The congenitally missing upper lateral incisor. A retrospective study of orthodontic space closure versus restorative treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2000;22(6):697‐710. doi:10.1093/ejo/22.6.697
4.
SembGSShawWC. Facial growth in orofacial clefting disorders. In: TurveyTAvigKWLFonsecaRJ, eds. Facial clefts and craniosynostosis principles and management. WB Saunders; 1996:28‐56.
5.
GoodPMMullikenJBPadwaBL. Frequency of Le Fort I osteotomy after repaired cleft lip and palate or cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2007;44(4):396‐401. doi:10.1597/06-075.1
6.
DaskalogiannakisJMehtaM. The need for orthognathic surgery in patients with repaired complete unilateral and complete bilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009;46(5):498‐502. doi:10.1597/08-176.1
7.
HeliövaaraARautioJ. A comparison of craniofacial cephalometric morphology and the later need for orthognathic surgery in 6-year-old cleft children. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011;39(3):173‐176. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2010.03.020
8.
VosholIEvan der WalKGvan AdrichemLNOngkosuwitoEMKoudstaalMJ. The frequency of Le Fort I osteotomy in cleft patients. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49(2):160‐166. doi:10.1597/09-224
9.
Dalle OreCSchoenbrunnerABrandelMKronstadtNMcIntyreJJonesMGosmanA. Incidence of Le Fort Surgery in a mature cohort of patients with cleft lip and palate. Ann Plast Surg. 2017;78(5 Suppl 4):S199‐s203. doi:10.1097/sap.0000000000001049
10.
JacobLFahradyanAPaulsonPWlodarczykJRWolfswinkelEMJimenezCUrataMMHammoudehJA. Orthognathic surgery rate in cleft care. J Craniofac Surg. 2022;33(1):87‐92. doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000008002
11.
HeliövaaraALeikolaJHukkiJ. Craniofacial cephalometric morphology and later need for orthognathic surgery in 6-year-old children with bilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013;50(2):35‐40. doi:10.1597/11-262.1
12.
AntonarakisGSWattsGDaskalogiannakisJ. The need for orthognathic surgery in nonsyndromic patients with repaired isolated cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2015;52(1):8‐13. doi:10.1597/13-080
13.
GrilloRGomesBReisTCandidoIRMiloroMBorbaAM. Should orthognathic surgery be performed in growing patients? A scoping review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2023;51(1):60‐66. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2023.01.004
14.
CheungLKChuaHD. A meta-analysis of cleft maxillary osteotomy and distraction osteogenesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;35(1):14‐24. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2005.06.008
15.
KloukosDFudalejPSequeira-ByronPKatsarosC. Maxillary distraction osteogenesis versus orthognathic surgery for cleft lip and palate patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;2018(8):Cd010403. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010403.pub3
16.
AlberconiTFSiqueiraGLCSathlerRKellyKAGaribDG. Assessment of orthodontic burden of care in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(1):74‐78. doi:10.1177/1055665617718825
17.
HameedOAminNHariaPPatelBHayN. Orthodontic burden of care for patients with a cleft lip and/or palate. J Orthod. 2019;46(1):63‐67. doi:10.1177/1465312518823010
18.
ChoiSHKimJSChaJYHwangCJ. Effect of malocclusion severity on oral health-related quality of life and food intake ability in a Korean population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;149(3):384‐390. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.08.019
19.
AntounJSFowlerPVJackHCFarellaM. Oral health-related quality of life changes in standard, cleft, and surgery patients after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;148(4):568‐575. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.03.028
20.
SuojanenJLeikolaJStoorP. The use of patient-specific implants in orthognathic surgery: A series of 32 maxillary osteotomy patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(12):1913‐1916. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2016.09.008
21.
KotaniemiKVMHeliövaaraAKotaniemiMStoorPLeikolaJPalotieTSuojanenJ. Comparison of postoperative skeletal stability of maxillary segments after Le Fort I osteotomy, using patient-specific implant versus mini-plate fixation. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(7):1020‐1030. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2019.04.003
22.
RückschloßTRistowOMüllerMKühleRZinglerSEngelMHoffmannJFreudlspergerC. Accuracy of patient-specific implants and additive-manufactured surgical splints in orthognathic surgery - A three-dimensional retrospective study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(6):847‐853. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2019.02.011
23.
KraeimaJSchepersRHSpijkervetFKLMaalTJJBaanFWitjesMJHJansmaJ. Splintless surgery using patient-specific osteosynthesis in Le Fort I osteotomies: A randomized controlled multi-centre trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;49(4):454‐460. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2019.08.005
24.
MertaMHeliövaaraALeikolaJSuojanenJ. Early experience of wafer-free Le Fort I osteotomy with patient-specific implants in cleft lip and palate patients. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2023;77:78‐86. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2022.10.051
25.
EpkerBNWessbergGA. Mechanisms of early skeletal release following surgical advancement of the mandible. Br J Oral Surg. 1982;20(3):175‐182. doi:10.1016/s0007-117x(82)80035-8
26.
WolfordLMCassanoDSCottrellDAEl DeebMKarrasSCGoncalvesJR. Orthognathic surgery in the young cleft patient: Preliminary study on subsequent facial growth. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66(12):2524‐2536. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2008.06.104
27.
HarjunpääRAlaluusuaSLeikolaJHeliövaaraA. Le Fort I Osteotomy in Cleft Patients: Maxillary advancement and articulation. J Craniofac Surg. 2022;33(2):597‐601. doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000008081
28.
DoğanSOnçağGAkinY. Craniofacial development in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;44(1):28‐33. doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2005.07.023
29.
HarjunpääRAlaluusuaSLeikolaJHeliövaaraA. Le Fort I osteotomy in cleft patients: Maxillary advancement and velopharyngeal function. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(12):1868‐1874. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2019.11.017
30.
AlaluusuaSHarjunpääRTurunenLGeneidALeikolaJHeliövaaraA. The effect of maxillary advancement on articulation of alveolar consonants in cleft patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2020;48(5):472‐476. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2020.02.002
31.
HuangCSHarikrishnanPLiaoYFKoEWLiouEJChenPK. Long-term follow-up after maxillary distraction osteogenesis in growing children with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2007;44(3):274‐277. doi:10.1597/06-104
32.
GürsoySHukkiJHurmerintaK. Five-year follow-up of maxillary distraction osteogenesis on the dentofacial structures of children with cleft lip and palate. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;68(4):744‐750. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2009.07.036
33.
MeazziniMCBasileVMazzoleniFBozzettiABrusatiR. Long-term follow-up of large maxillary advancements with distraction osteogenesis in growing and non-growing cleft lip and palate patients. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;68(1):79‐86. doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2014.08.069
34.
MathewsATDammlingCWWaitePDKinardBE. Does the rigid external distraction device Alter maxillary pitch in cleft maxillary distraction?Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2023;60(12):1572‐1577. doi:10.1177/10556656221109413
35.
GoelPFahradyanAWolfswinkelEMJacobLYenSL-KUrataMMHammoudehJA. Is Le Fort I distraction enough to treat severe midface hypoplasia?J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32(5):1716‐1720. doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000007448
36.
VelasquesBDMouraLBMartinsJRDamianMFXavierCB. What is the relapse after Le Fort I maxillary advancement in cleft lip and palate patients? A systematic review. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;25(2):139‐148. doi:10.1007/s10006-020-00906-y
37.
LundbergJAl-TaaiNLevring JäghagenERansjöMSjöströmM. Skeletal stability after maxillary distraction osteogenesis or conventional Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with cleft lip and palate: A superimposition-based cephalometric analysis. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024;28(2):925‐934. doi:10.1007/s10006-024-01227-0
38.
CheungLKLohJSHoSM. The early psychological adjustment of cleft patients after maxillary distraction osteogenesis and conventional orthognathic surgery: A preliminary study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64(12):1743‐1750. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2005.12.060
39.
FeitosaMCPGaribDde Cássia Moura Carvalho LaurisRHerkrathAPQVettoreMV. The impact of orthognathic surgery on quality of life in individuals with oral clefts. Eur J Orthod. 2022;44(2):170‐177. doi:10.1093/ejo/cjab039
40.
JohnstonCHuntOBurdenDStevensonMHepperP. Self-perception of dentofacial attractiveness among patients requiring orthognathic surgery. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(2):361‐366. doi:10.2319/051209-252.1
41.
ModiRNBlumJDAtasevenBBelzaCCMontesELeungKLZaldana-FlynnMRapoportCSChoiAKEwingE,et al.To operate or not to operate? Reconstructive surgical burden and quality of life of pediatric patients with facial differences. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2024;61(10):1632‐1638. doi:10.1177/10556656231176879
42.
van VlijmenOJMaalTBergéSJBronkhorstEMKatsarosCKuijpers-JagtmanAM. A comparison between 2D and 3D cephalometry on CBCT scans of human skulls. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(2):156‐160. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2009.11.017
43.
SchölinJSRizellSPaganiniAMarkH. A national registry-based study of surgery and demography comparing internationally adopted and children born in Sweden with cleft lip and/or palate. J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2023;57(1–6):354‐359. doi:10.1080/2000656x.2022.2097252
