To compare osteomeatal complex (OMC) anatomical variations and nasal cavity airway volume between individuals with cleft lip and palate (CLP) and healthy controls using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Design
Retrospective, cross-sectional study.
Setting
Department of dentomaxillofacial radiology.
Patients/Participants
CBCT images of 200 individuals were evaluated: 100 patients with CLP (mean age 13.64 ± 4.32 years) and 100 age- and sex-matched controls (mean age 13.67 ± 4.32 years). Patients with syndromes, maxillofacial trauma, prior orthognathic surgery, or inadequate image quality were excluded.
Main Outcome Measures
Presence of OMC anatomical variations and nasal cavity airway volume.
Results
Agger nasi cells were the most common anatomical variation and hypertrophic turbinates were the most frequent pathology in both groups. Haller cells (p = 0.006) and nasal septal pneumatization (p = 0.001) were more prevalent in controls. In contrast, paradoxical middle turbinate (p = 0.015), nasal septal deviation (p = 0.001), and mucosal thickening (p = 0.001) were more frequent in CLP. Total nasal cavity airway volume did not differ significantly between groups.
Conclusions
Individuals with CLP exhibit distinct OMC anatomical patterns compared with controls; however, total nasal cavity volume is not significantly altered. These findings indicate that regional OMC alterations and overall nasal cavity volume represent related but distinct anatomical constructs.
BandyopadhyayRBiswasRBhattacherjeeSPanditNGhoshS. Osteomeatal complex: A study of its anatomical variation among patients attending North Bengal Medical College and Hospital. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;67(3):281-286. doi:10.1007/s12070-015-0874-z
3.
GökselSÖzcanİ. A CBCT study for anatomic variations of the osteomeatal complex in patients with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2023;60(1):13-20. doi:10.1177/10556656211053773
4.
GruszkaKAksoySRóżyło-KalinowskaIGülbeşMMKalinowskiPOrhanK. A comparative study of paranasal sinus and nasal cavity anatomic variations between the Polish and Turkish Cypriot population using CBCT. Head Face Med. 2022;18(1):37. doi:10.1186/s13005-022-00340-3
5.
LloydGALundVJScaddingGK. CT Of the paranasal sinuses and functional endoscopic surgery: A critical analysis of 100 symptomatic patients. J Laryngol Otol. 1991;105(3):181-185. doi:10.1017/S0022215100115300
6.
MohebbiAAhmadiAEtemadiMSafdarianMGhourchianS. An epidemiologic study of factors associated with nasal septum deviation by computed tomography scan: A cross-sectional study. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord. 2012;12:15. doi:10.1186/1472-6815-12-15
7.
ChengSYYangCJLeeCHLiuS-CKuoC-YLeeJ-CShihC-P. The association of superior attachment of the uncinate process with pneumatization of the middle turbinate: A computed tomographic analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017;274(4):1905-1910. doi:10.1007/s00405-016-4441-3
8.
DrakeAFDavisJUWarrenDW. Nasal airway size in cleft and noncleft children. Laryngoscope. 1993;103(8):915-917. doi:10.1288/00005537-199308000-00014
9.
AloisCIRuotoloRA. An overview of cleft lip and palate. JAAPA. 2020;33(12):17-20. doi:10.1097/01.JAA.0000721644.06681.06
10.
NasreddineGEl HajjJGhassibe-SabbaghM. Orofacial clefts: Embryology, classification, epidemiology, and genetics. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res. 2021;787:108373. doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2021.108373
11.
BolgerWEButzinCAParsonsDS. Paranasal sinus bony anatomic variations and mucosal abnormalities: CT analysis for endoscopic sinus surgery. Laryngoscope. 1991;101(1 Pt 1):56-64. doi:10.1288/00005537-199101000-00010
12.
EarwakerJ. Anatomic variants in sinonasal CT. Radiographics. 1993;13(2):381-415. doi:10.1148/radiographics.13.2.8460226
13.
JoeJKHoSYYanagisawaE. Documentation of variations in sinonasal anatomy by intraoperative nasal endoscopy. Laryngoscope. 2000;110(2 Pt 1):229-235. doi:10.1097/00005537-200002010-00008
14.
KayalıoğluGOyarOGovşaF. Nasal cavity and paranasal sinus bony variations: A computed tomographic study. Rhinology. 2000;38(3):108-113.
15.
MaruYKGuptaV. Anatomic variations of the bone in sinonasal CT. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;53(2):123-128. doi:10.1007/BF02991504
16.
Al-QudahM. The relationship between anatomical variations of the sinonasal region and chronic sinusitis extension in children. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;72(6):817-821. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2008.02.006
17.
WaniAAKanotraSLateefMAhmadRQaziSMAhmadS. CT Scan evaluation of the anatomical variations of the ostiomeatal complex. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;61(3):163-168. doi:10.1007/s12070-009-0059-8
18.
WeeJHKimDWLeeJERheeC-SLeeCHMinY-GKimD-Y. Classification and prevalence of nasal septal deformity in Koreans according to two classification systems. Acta Otolaryngol. 2012;132(6):S52-SS57. doi:10.3109/00016489.2012.661077
19.
AngélicoFVJrRapoportPB. Analysis of the agger nasi cell and frontal sinus ostium sizes using computed tomography of the paranasal sinuses. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;79(3):285-292. doi:10.5935/1808-8694.20130052
20.
MathewROmamiGHandAFellowsDLurieA. Cone beam CT analysis of Haller cells: Prevalence and clinical significance. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42(9):20130055. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20130055
21.
KaygusuzAHakseverMAkdumanDAslanSSayarZ. Sinonasal anatomical variations: Their relationship with chronic rhinosinusitis and effect on the severity of disease—A computerized tomography assisted anatomical and clinical study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;66(2):260-2266. doi:10.1007/s12070-013-0678-y
22.
PrasadSVarshneySBistSSMishraSKabdwalN. Correlation study between nasal septal deviation and rhinosinusitis. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;65(4):363-366. doi:10.1007/s12070-013-0665-3
23.
OrhanİSoyluEAltınGYılmazFÇalımÖFÖrmeciT. Analysis of anatomic variations of paranasal sinus by computed tomography. Abant Med J. 2014;3(2):145-149. doi:10.5505/abantmedj.2014.84803
24.
BananRDaliliZSigaroudiAKSedaghatiMJ. Evaluation of anatomical variations of paranasal sinuses in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis in comparing with normal individuals. J Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016;4(4):1-6. doi:https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.3dj.4.4.1
25.
ÇalışkanASumerAPBulutE. Evaluation of anatomical variations of the nasal cavity and ethmoidal complex on cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Radiol. 2017;33(1):51-59. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0248-6
26.
GüngörGOkurNOkurE. Uncinate process variations and their relationship with ostiomeatal Complex: A pictorial essay of multidedector computed tomography (MDCT) findings. Pol J Radiol. 2016;81:173-1180. doi:10.12659/PJR.895885
27.
DasarUGökçeE. Evaluation of variations in sinonasal region with computed tomography. World J Radiol. 2016;8(1):98-108. doi:10.4329/wjr.v8.i1.98
28.
DevarajaKDoreswamySMPujaryKRamaswamyBPillaiS. Anatomical variations of the nose and paranasal sinuses: A computed tomographic study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;71(3):2231-2240. doi:10.1007/s12070-019-01716-9
29.
MoshfeghiMAbedianBGhazizadeh AhsaieMTajdiniF. Prevalence of nasal septum deviation using cone-beam computed tomography: A cross-sectional study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2020;11(2):223-2147. doi:10.4103/ccd.ccd_110_19
30.
DikiciODurgutO. The relationship between nasal septal deviation and anatomical variations of the paranasal sinus. The European Research Journal. 2021;7(2):170-176. doi:10.18621/eurj.645582
31.
DedeoğluNAltunOKüçükEBAltındişSHatunoğluE. Evaluation of the anatomical variation in the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses of patients with cleft lip and palate using cone beam computed tomography. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2017;117(12):691-696. doi:10.4149/BLL_2016_133
32.
GanooTSjöströmM. Outcomes of maxillary orthognathic surgery in patients with cleft lip and palate: A literature review. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2019;18(4):500-508. doi:10.1007/s12663-019-01217-w
MladinaR. The role of maxillar morphology in the development of pathological septal deformities. Rhinology. 1987;25(3):199-205.
35.
MureşanANMogoantăCAStănescuRRusuMC. The sinus septi nasi and other minor pneumatizations of the nasal septum. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2021;62(1):227-231. doi:10.47162/RJME.62.1.22
36.
GlupkerLKulaKParksEBablerWStewartKGhoneimaA. Three-dimensional computed tomography analysis of airway volume changes between open and closed jaw positions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(4):426-434. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.025
37.
Pérez-PiñasISabatéJCarmonaACatalina-HerreraCJJiménez-CastellanosJ. Anatomical variations in the human paranasal sinus region studied by CT. J Anat. 2000;197(Pt 2):221-227. doi:10.1046/j.1469-7580.2000.19720221.x
MosherHP. Symposium on the ethmoid: The surgical anatomy of the ethmoidal labyrinth. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1929;34:376-410.
40.
JacobsJBShpiznerBABrunnerELebowitzRAHollidayRA. Role of the agger nasi cell in chronic frontal sinusitis. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1996;105(9):694-700. doi:10.1177/000348949610500905
41.
MarquezSTessemaBClementPASchaeferSD. Development of the ethmoid Sinus and extramural migration: The anatomical basis of this paranasal Sinus. Anat Rec. 2008;291(11):1535-1553. doi:10.1002/ar.20775
42.
KarMAltıntaşM. The incidence of concha bullosa: A retrospective radiologic study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2023;280(2):731-735. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-022-07552-y
SuzukiHYamaguchiTFurukawaM. Rhinologic computed tomographic evaluation in patients with cleft lip and palate. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125(9):1000-1004. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.125.9.1000
45.
DinçKKökHİçözD. Evaluation of maxillary sinus volume, nasal septum deviation, and the presence of concha bullosa in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate: A retrospective study. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dent Sci. 2023;29(3):425-433. doi:10.5336/dentalsci.2023-95816
46.
GökselS. Retrospective evaluation of the anatomical variations of the osteomeatal complex using cone beam computed tomography by comparing the cleft lip palate patients and the healthy population. Doctoral Dissertation, Istanbul University; 2019. YÖK National Thesis Center. Thesis No: 579632.
47.
RohrichRJKruegerJKAdamsWPJrMarpleBF. Rationale for submucous resection of hypertrophied inferior turbinates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(2):200-214. doi:10.1097/00006534-200108000-00040
48.
EgeliEDemirciLYazıcıBHarputluoğluU. Evaluation of the Inferior turbinate in patients with deviated nasal septum by using computed tomography. Laryngoscope. 2004;114(1):113-117. doi:10.1097/00005537-200401000-00020
49.
ShettySRAl BayattiSWAl-RawiNHMareiHReddySAbdelmagydHANarasimhanSAl KawasSMathewA. Analysis of inferior nasal turbinate width and concha bullosa in subjects with nasal septum deviation: A cone beam tomography study. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):206. doi:10.1186/s12903-021-01576-2
50.
DemirDAsilKGüvenMKayabaşoğluGYılmazMS. Assessment of the correlation between nasal septal deviation and compensatory hypertrophy of the middle turbinate. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272(10):2847-2851. doi:10.1007/s00405-014-3387-6
51.
MølstedKDahlE. Asymmetry of the maxilla in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J. 1990;27(2):184-192. doi:10.1597/1545-1569(1990)027<0184:AOTMIC>2.3.CO;2
52.
KolbenstvedtAAaløkkenTMArctanderKJohannessenS. CT Appearances of unilateral cleft palate 20 years after bone graft surgery. Acta Radiol. 2002;43(6):567-570. doi:10.1080/16000455.2002.430605
53.
SuriSUtrejaAKhandelwalNMagoSK. Craniofacial computerized tomography analysis of the midface of patients with repaired complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134(3):418-429. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.09.065
54.
StarbuckJMFrielMTGhoneimaAFloresRLTholpadySKulaK. Nasal airway and septal variation in unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate. Clin Anat. 2014;27(7):999-1008. doi:10.1002/ca.22428
55.
LoftusPAWiseSKNietoDPanellaNAikenADelGaudioJM. Intranasal volume increases with age: Computed tomography volumetric analysis in adults. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(10):2212-2215. doi:10.1002/lary.26064
56.
FarzalZWalshJLopes de Rezende BarbosaGZdanskiCJDavisSDSuperfineRPimentaLAKimbellJSDrakeAF. Volumetric nasal cavity analysis in children with unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(6):1475-1480. doi:10.1002/lary.25543
57.
ErtaşÜAtaolM. Evaluation of nasal airway volume of operated unilateral cleft lip and palate patients compared with skeletal class III individuals. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2019;56(1):15-20. doi:10.1177/1055665618774024
58.
EcclesR. Nasal airflow in health and disease. Acta Otolaryngol. 2000;120(5):580-595. doi:10.1080/000164800750000388
