PeerJ. 2021 Dec 16;9:e12643. doi: 10.7717/peerj.12643. eCollection 2021.
Long-term follow-up of mandibular dental arch changes in patients with complete non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate.
PeerJ
Sariesendy Sumardi, Benny S Latief, Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman, Edwin M Ongkosuwito, Ewald M Bronkhorst, Mette A R Kuijpers
Affiliations
Affiliations
- Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
- Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral-Maxillofacial Surgery, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
- Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
- Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, School of Dental Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
- Department of Orthodontics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
- Department of Dentistry - Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Dentistry, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
PMID: 35003933
PMCID: PMC8684719 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12643
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of cleft lip and palate (CLP) requires a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach and long-term follow-up. Only a few studies are available that reported on changes after treatment, which showed that in particular the transverse dimension, in patients with CLP is prone to changes after treatment. However, those studies did not pay attention to concomitant changes in the mandibular arch that occur after treatment.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate mandibular transverse dental arch dimensions and interarch transverse changes in patients with complete non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (CUCLAP) up to five years after treatment.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective longitudinal study in 75 consecutive patients with CUCLAP directly after comprehensive treatment (T0), two (T2), and 5 years after treatment (T5). Great Ormond Street, London and Oslo (GOSLON) scores were available for all patients. Three-dimensional scans of all dental casts were made. Inter premolar and intermolar distances between the mandibular contralateral teeth were measured. The modified Huddart Bodenham (MHB index) was applied to assess the transverse interarch relationship. Paired t-tests and ANOVA were used to analyze transverse and interarch transverse changes. Linear regression analysis was done to define contributing factors.
RESULTS: Paired t-tests showed a significant decrease of the mandibular inter first and second premolar distances (
CONCLUSIONS: Changes occurred in the mandibular arch expressed as changes in the transverse dimensions and interarch relationship measured by the MHB Index. A younger age at the end of treatment, space closure for a missing maxillary lateral incisor and a higher GOSLON score at the end of treatment negatively influence the interarch transverse deterioration especially in the first two years after treatment. For the transverse dimensional changes in the mandibular arch such influencing factors could not be determined.
©2021 Sumardi et al.
Keywords: Complete unilateral cleft lip and palate; Dental casts; Long-term outcome; Mandibular dental arch; Modified Huddart-Bodenham Index; Unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate
Conflict of interest statement
Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman is an academic editor for PeerJ. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests.
References
- Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2015 Nov;122(11):575-81 - PubMed
- Eur J Orthod. 2012 Aug;34(4):418-26 - PubMed
- BMC Oral Health. 2020 May 27;20(1):154 - PubMed
- Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Dec;124(6):615-24 - PubMed
- Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Dec;19(9):2255-65 - PubMed
- Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2013 May;2(4):122-141 - PubMed
- Eur J Orthod. 2004 Aug;26(4):385-90 - PubMed
- J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019 Apr;47(4):578-585 - PubMed
- J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015 Dec;43(10):2106-11 - PubMed
- Eur J Orthod. 2009 Apr;31(2):109-20 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Mar-Apr;29(2):384-90 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2022 Jan;59(1):86-97 - PubMed
- Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2021 Feb;159(2):184-192 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017 Sep;54(5):571-581 - PubMed
- Arch Oral Biol. 1991;36(11):837-43 - PubMed
- Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Aug;154(2):188-200 - PubMed
- Front Oral Biol. 2012;16:1-18 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate J. 1972 Jul;9:194-209 - PubMed
- Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 10;8:CD010403 - PubMed
- Turk J Orthod. 2019 Sep;32(3):139-144 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010 Nov;47(6):591-6 - PubMed
- J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Nov;31(11):1024-8 - PubMed
- Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2012 Oct;78(5):116-20 - PubMed
- Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jan-Jun;5(1):32-6 - PubMed
- Angle Orthod. 2019 Jan;89(1):87-92 - PubMed
- J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2018 Apr;71(4):504-517 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Sep-Oct;29(5):1098-105 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997 Jan;34(1):21-6 - PubMed
- J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2017 Feb;51(1):88-93 - PubMed
- Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006 Dec;130(6):721-31 - PubMed
- J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Feb 12;: - PubMed
- Orthod Craniofac Res. 2018 May;21(2):78-83 - PubMed
- Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Jul;49(7):952-959 - PubMed
- J Appl Oral Sci. 2019 Jun 13;27:e20180434 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002 Jul;39(4):425-31 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008 May;45(3):278-83 - PubMed
- J Craniofac Surg. 2021 Jul-Aug 01;32(5):e501-e504 - PubMed
- Nat Rev Genet. 2011 Mar;12(3):167-78 - PubMed
- Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018 Jan;55(1):137-156 - PubMed
Publication Types