To evaluate the dental arch relationship (DAR) of nonsyndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and to explore the various phenotype and postnatal treatment factors that are responsible for poor DAR.
Design:
Retrospective study.
Setting:
School of Dental Science, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Subjects:
Eighty-four Bangladeshi children with nonsyndromic UCLP who received cheiloplasty and palatoplasty.
Main Outcome Measures:
Dental models were taken at 5 to 12 years of age (man: 7.69), and dental arch relationships were assessed using modified Huddart/Bodenham index (mHB) by two raters. Kappa statistics was used to evaluate the intra- and interexaminer agreements, chi-square was used to assess the associations, and logistic regression analysis was used to explore the responsible factors that affect DAR.
Results:
The total mHB score (mean [SD]) was −8.261 (7.115). Intra- and interagreement was very good. Using crude and stepwise backward regression analysis, significant association was found between positive history of class III (P = .025, P = .030, respectively) and unfavorable DAR. Complete UCLP (P = .003) was also significantly correlated with unfavorable DAR.
Conclusion:
This multivariate study suggested complete type of UCLP and positive history of class III had a significantly unfavorable effect on the DAR.
AlamM.K.IidaJ.SatoY.KajiiT.S.Postnatal treatment factors affecting craniofacial morphology of unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) patients in a Japanese population. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 51: 205–210.
2.
AlamM.K.KajiiT.S.MatsunoM.K.KatoY.S.IidaJ.Multivariate analysis of factors affecting dental arch relationships in Japanese unilateral cleft lip and palate patients at Hokkaido University Hospital. Orthodontic Waves. 2008; 67: 45–53.
3.
AliS.A.MosseyP.A.GillgrassT.A study model based photographic method for assessment of surgical treatment outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28: 366–372.
4.
AltalabiM.SaltajiH.EdwardsR.MajorP.W.MirC.F.Indices to assess malocclusions in patients with cleft lip and palate. Euro J Orthod. 2013; 35: 772–782.
5.
AltmanD.G.Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991.
6.
AntonarakisG.S.AdibfarA.TompsonB.D.PaedoD.DaskalogiannakisJ.FisherD.M.Presurgical cleft lip anthropometrics and dental arch relationships in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2015; 52: 269–276.
7.
ApostolD.The Onijuka technique in treating the cleft lip and palate. Jurnalulpediatrulul. 2008; 11: 41–42.
8.
AtackN.HathornI.S.SembG.DowellT.SandyJ.A new index for assessing surgical outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects aged five: reproducibility and validity. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997b; 34: 242–246.
9.
BongaartsC.A.van't HofM.A.Prahl-AndersenB.DirksI.V.Kuijpers-JagtmanA.M.Infant orthopedics has no effect on maxillary arch dimensions in the deciduous dentition of children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (Dutchcleft). Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006; 43: 665–72.
10.
ChoudharyS.CadierM.A.ShinnD.L.ShekharK.McDowallR.A.Effect of Veau-Wardill-Kilner type of cleft palate repair on long-term midfacial growth. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003; 111: 576–582.
11.
DobbynL.GillgrassT.McIntyreG.MacfarlaneT.MosseyP.Validating the clinical use of the modified Huddart and Bodenham scoring system for outcome in cleft lip and/or palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2015; 52; 671–675.
12.
DobbynL.M.WeirJ.T.MacfarlaneT.V.MosseyP.A.Calibration of the modified Huddart and Bodenham scoring system against the GOSLON/5-year-olds’ index for unilateral cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34: 762–767.
13.
FarzanehF.LindmanR.BeckerM.HansenK.SvenssonH.Von Langenbeck procedures at 8 months or Wardill at 18 months for primary repair of cleft palate in adult Swedish patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate: a study of facial growth. Scand J Plast Reconstruction Surg Hand Surg. 2008; 42: 67–76.
14.
FerdousK.M.N.UllahM.S.ShajahanM.MitulM.A.R.IslamM.K.DasK.K.MannanM.A.RahmanM.J.BiswasS.Simultaneous repair of cleft hard palate by vomer flap along with cleft lip in unilateral complete cleft lip and palate patients. ISRN Plast Surg. 2013; 954576.
15.
FriedeH.EnemarkH.SembG.PaulinG.AbyholmF.BolundS.LiljaJ.OstrupL.Craniofacial and occlusal characteristics in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients from four Scandinavian centres. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 199; 25: 269–276.
16.
FudalejP.KatsarosC.BongaartsC.DudkiewiczZ.JagtmanA.M.K.Dental arch relationship in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate following one-stage and three-stage surgical protocols. Clin Oral Invest. 2011; 15: 503–510.
17.
FudalejP.KatsarosC.DudkiewiczZ.OffertB.PiwowarW.KuijpersM.Kuijpers-JagtmanA.M.Dental arch relationships following palatoplasty for cleft lip and palate repair. J Dent Res. 2012; 91: 47–51.
18.
GagglA.FeichtingerM.SchultesG.SantlerG.PichlmaierM.MossbockR.Cephalometric and occlusal outcome in adults with unilateral cleft lip, palate and alveolus after two different surgical techniques. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2003; 40: 249–255.
19.
GalarragaI.M.C.Use of botulinum toxin in cheiloplasty: a new method to decrease tension. Can J Plast Surg. 2009; 17: e1–e2.
20.
GaukrogerM.J.NoarJ.H.SandersR., and SembG.A cephalometric inter-centre comparison of growth in children with cleft lip and palate. J Orthod. 2002; 29: 113–117.
21.
GrayD.MosseyP.A.Evaluation of a modified Huddart/Bodenham scoring system for assessment of maxillary arch constriction in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects. Eur J Orthod. 2005; 27: 507–511.
22.
HaqueS.AlamM.K.Common dental anomalies in cleft lip and palate patients. Malays J Med Sci. 2015; 22: 55–60.
23.
HaqueS.AlamM.K.ArshadA.I.An overview of indices used to measure treatment effectiveness in patients with cleft lip and palate. Malays J Med Sci. 2015; 22: 4–11.
24.
HaqueS.AlamM.K.BasriR.Gene involvement in cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients. Ban J Med Sci. 2015; 14: 113–116.
25.
HuddartAGBodenhamR.S.The evaluation of arch form and occlusion in unilateral cleft palate subjects. Cleft Palate J. 1972; 9: 194–209.
26.
HuangC.S.WangW.I.LiouE.J.W.ChenY.R.ChenP.K.T.NoordhoffM.S.Effects of cheiloplasty on maxillary dental arch development in infants with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002; 39: 513–516.
27.
IshikawaH.NakamuraS.MisakiK.KudohM.FukudaH.YoshidaS.Scar tissue distribution on palates and its relation to maxillary dental arch form. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998; 35: 313–319.
28.
KajiiT.S.AlamM.K.MilkoyaT.OyamaA.Koshikawa-MatsunoM.Sugawara-KatoY.SatoY.IidaJ.Congenital and postnatal factors including malocclusion in Japanese unilateral cleft lip and patient-determination using logistic regression analysis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013; 50: 466–472.
29.
KulewiczM.DudkiewiczZ.Craniofacial morphological outcome following treatment with three different surgical protocols for complete unilateral cleft lip and palate: a preliminary study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 39: 122–128.
30.
LiaoY.F.MarsM.Hard palate repair timing and facial morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate: before versus after pubertal peak velocity age. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006; 43: 259–265.
31.
ManosudprasitM.WangsrimongkolT.KitsahawongS.ThienkosolT.Comparison of the modified Huddart/Bodenham and GOSLON Yardstick methods for assessing outcomes following primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Med Assoc Thai. 2011; 94(Suppl 6): S15–20.
32.
MarazitaM.L.The evolution of human genetic studies of cleft lip and cleft palate. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2012; 13: 263–283.
33.
MarsM.PlintD.A.HoustonW.J.B.BerglandO.SembG.The GOSLON Yardstick: a new system of assessing dental arch relationships in children with unilateral clefts of the lip and palate. Cleft Palate J. 1987; 24: 314–322.
34.
MeyerE.SeyferA.Cleft lip repair: technical refinements for the wide lips. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2010; 3: 81–86.
MikoyaT.ShibukawaT.SusamiT.SatoY.TenganT.KatashimaH.OyamaA.MatsuzawaY.ItoY.FunayamaE.Dental arch relationship outcomes in one- and two-stage palatoplasty for Japanese patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2015; 52: 277–286.
37.
MosseyP.A.ClarkJ.D.GrayD.Preliminary investigation of a modified Huddart/Bodenham scoring system for assessment of maxillary arch constriction in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects. Eur J Orthod. 2003; 25: 251–257.
38.
NoverrazR.L.DisseM.A.OngkosuwitoE.M.Kuijpers-JagtmanA.M.PrahlC.Transverse dental arch relationship at 9 and 12 years in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate treated with infant orthopedics: a randomized clinical trial (DUTCHCLEFT). Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19: 2255–2265.
39.
PigottR.W.AlberyE.H.HathornI.S.AtackN.E.WilliamsA.HarlandK.A comparison of three methods of repairing the hard palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002; 39: 383–391.
40.
RousseauP.MetzgerM.FruchtS.SchuppW.HempelM.OttenJ.E.Effect of lip closure on early maxillary growth in patients with cleft lip and palate. JAMA Facial Plastic Surg. 2013; 15: 369–373.
41.
SasaguriM.HakM.S.NakamuraN.SuzukiA.SulaimanF.K.NakamuraS.OhishiM.Effects of Hotz's plate and lip adhesion on maxillary arch in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate until 5 years of age. J Oral MaxillofacSurgMedi Path. 2014; 26: 292–300.
42.
TanO.AtikB.Triangular with Alanasi (TAN) repair of unilateral cleft lips: a personal technique and early outcomes. J Craniofac Surg. 2007; 18: 186–197.
43.
WangsrimongkolT.JansawangW.The assessment of treatment outcome by evaluation of dental arch relationships in cleft lip/palate. J Med Assoc Thai. 2010; 93(Suppl 4): S100–S106.
44.
YamanishiT.NishioJ.SakoM.KoharaH.HiranoY.YamanishiY.Early two-stage double opposing Z- plasty or one-stage push-back palatoplasty: comparisons in maxillary development and speech outcome at 4 years of age. Ann Plast Surg. 2011; 66: 148–153.
45.
ZaleckasL.LinkevicineL.OlekasJ.KutraN.The comparison of different surgical techniques used for repair of complete unilateral cleft lip. Medicina (Kaunas). 2011; 47: 85–90.
