Six-year post-surgical evaluation in the treatment protocols in the dental arches of children with oral cleft: longitudinal study
- PMID: 35920507
- PMCID: PMC9586431
- DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2022-0120
Six-year post-surgical evaluation in the treatment protocols in the dental arches of children with oral cleft: longitudinal study
Abstract
Objective: Oral cleft surgical repairs are performed using different techniques worldwide. To evaluate and compare the development of the dental arches of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate before and after the primary surgeries performed with different techniques at the first months and six years of life.
Methodology: This is a retrospective longitudinal study. The sample comprised 56 dental casts divided int the following groups: Group 1 (G1) - cheiloplasty (Millard technique) at three months and one-step palatoplasty (von Langenbeck technique) at 12 months; and Group 2 (G2) - cheiloplasty (Millard technique) and two-step palatoplasty: anterior hard palate closure (Hans Pichler technique) at three months and posterior soft palate closure (Sommerlad technique) at 12 months. The digitized dental casts were evaluated at three months - pre-surgical (T1) and six years of life- post-surgical (T2). The following linear measurements were analyzed: intercanine (C-C'), intertuberosity (T-T') distances; anterior dental arch (I-CC'), anterior intersegment (I-C'), and total arch (I-TT') lengths. The palate area was also measured. Parametric and non-parametric tests were applied (p<0.05).
Results: In G1, the intragroup comparison showed statistically significant smaller I-CC' and I-C' at T2 (p=0.001 and p<0.001, respectively), while T-T', I-TT', and area comparisons were significantly greater (p<0.001, p=0.002, and p<0.001, respectively). In G2, the intragroup comparison exhibited statistically significant smaller C-C' and I-C' at T2 (p=0.004, for both), whereas T-T', I-TT' and area comparisons were significantly greater (p<0.001, p=0.004, and p<0.001, respectively). At T2, the intergroup analysis revealed that G1 had a statistically significant smaller I-CC' (p=0.014). The analysis of the intergroup differences (∆=T2-T1) showed that G1 had a statistically smaller I-CC' (p=0.043).
Conclusion: The two-step palatoplasty showed a more favorable prognosis for the maxillary growth than one-step palatoplasty in children with oral clefts.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Across-surface distances after one- and two-stage palatoplasty in children with oral cleft.Braz J Med Biol Res. 2024 Oct 14;57:e13805. doi: 10.1590/1414-431X2024e13805. eCollection 2024. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2024. PMID: 39417450 Free PMC article.
-
Analysis of Dental Arch in Children With Oral Cleft Before and After the Primary Surgeries.J Craniofac Surg. 2019 Nov-Dec;30(8):2456-2458. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000005775. J Craniofac Surg. 2019. PMID: 31369497
-
Palatal symmetry analysis of surgical protocols for oral clefts by 3D stereophotogrammetry.Odontology. 2025 Jul;113(3):1288-1295. doi: 10.1007/s10266-024-01048-3. Epub 2025 Jan 3. Odontology. 2025. PMID: 39751775
-
3D morphometric evaluation of the dental arches in children with cleft lip and palate submitted to different surgical techniques.Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Feb;26(2):1975-1983. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04177-z. Epub 2021 Oct 19. Clin Oral Investig. 2022. PMID: 34665341
-
Longitudinal morphometric analysis of dental arch of children with cleft lip and palate: 3D stereophotogrammetry study.Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018 Dec;126(6):463-468. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2018.08.012. Epub 2018 Aug 31. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018. PMID: 30249537
Cited by
-
Across-surface distances after one- and two-stage palatoplasty in children with oral cleft.Braz J Med Biol Res. 2024 Oct 14;57:e13805. doi: 10.1590/1414-431X2024e13805. eCollection 2024. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2024. PMID: 39417450 Free PMC article.
-
Three-Dimensional Anthropometric Analysis of the Effect of Lip Reconstructive Surgery on Children with Cleft Lip and Palate at Three Different Times.Children (Basel). 2024 Jul 5;11(7):824. doi: 10.3390/children11070824. Children (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39062273 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Freitas JA, Neves LT, Almeida AL, Garib DG, Trindade-Suedam IK, Yaedú RY, et al. Rehabilitative treatment of cleft lip and palate: experience of the Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies/USP (HRAC/USP)--Part 1: overall aspects. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(1):9-15. doi: 10.1590/s1678-7757201200010000 - PubMed
-
- Hoffmannova E, Moslerová V, Dupej J, Borský J, Bejdová Š, Velemínská J. Three-dimensional development of the upper dental arch in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients after early neonatal cheiloplasty. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;109:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.03.009 - PubMed
-
- Haque S, Khamis MF, Alam MK, Ahmad WM. Effects of multiple factors on treatment outcome in the three-dimensional maxillary arch morphometry of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(6):e534-8. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006464 - PubMed
-
- Ambrosio EC, Sforza C, Menezes M, Carrara CF, Soares S, Machado MA, et al. Prospective cohort 3D study of dental arches in children with bilateral orofacial cleft: assessment of volume and superimposition. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2021;31(5):606-12. doi: 10.1111/ipd.12731 - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical