Prediction of orthognathic surgery need in children with unilateral cleft lip palate: Dental arch relationships and 5-year-olds' index

Three-Dimensional Anthropometric Analysis of the Effect of Lip Reconstructive Surgery on Children with Cleft Lip and Palate at Three Different Times

OBJECTIVES

This investigation aimed to assess the optimal timing for lip repair in children with cleft lip and palate via 3D anthropometric analysis to evaluate their maxillofacial structures.

METHODS

The sample comprised 252 digitized dental models, divided into groups according to the following timing of lip repair: G1 (n = 50): 3 months; G2 (n = 50): 5 and 6 months; G3 (n = 26): 8 and 10 months. Models were evaluated at two-time points: T1: before lip repair; T2: at 5 years of age. Linear measurements, area, and Atack index were analyzed.

RESULTS

At T1, the intergroup analysis revealed that G1 had statistically significant lower means of I-C', I-C, C-C', and the sum of the segment areas compared to G2 (p = 0.0140, p = 0.0082, p = 0.0004, p < 0.0001, respectively). In addition, there was a statistically significant difference when comparing the cleft area between G2 and G3 (p = 0.0346). At T2, the intergroup analysis revealed that G1 presented a statistically significant mean I-C' compared to G3 (p = 0.0461). In the I-CC' length analysis, G1 and G3 showed higher means when compared to G2 (p = 0.0039). The I-T' measurement was statistically higher in G1 than in G2 (p = 0.0251). In the intergroup growth rate analysis, G1 and G2 showed statistically significant differences in the I-C' measurement compared to G3 (p = 0.0003). In the analysis of the Atack index, there was a statistically significant difference between G1 and the other sample sets (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Children who underwent surgery later showed better results in terms of the growth and development of the dental arches.

Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: comparison of dental arch relationships and dental indices at 5, 8, and 10 years

Background and trial design

The Scandcleft intercentre study evaluates the outcomes of four surgical protocols (common method Arm A, and methods B, C, and D) for treatment of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) in a set of three randomized trials of primary surgery (Trials 1, 2, and 3).

Objectives

To evaluate and compare dental arch relationships of 5-, 8-, and 10-year-old children with UCLP after four different protocols of primary surgery and to compare three dental indices. The results are secondary outcomes of the overall trial.

Methods

Study models taken at the ages of 5 (n = 418), 8 (n = 411), and 10 years (n = 410) were analysed by a blinded panel of orthodontists using the Eurocran index, the 5-year-olds’ (5YO) index, and the GOSLON Yardstick. Student’s t-test, Pearson’s correlation, chi-square test, and kappa statistics were used in statistical analyses.

Results

The reliability of the dental indices varied between moderate and very good, and those of the Eurocran palatal index varied between fair and very good. Significant correlations existed between the dental indices at all ages. No differences were found in the mean 5-, 8-, and 10-year index scores or their distributions within surgical trials. Comparisons between trials detected significantly better mean index scores in Trial 2 Arm C (at all ages) and in Trial 1 Arm B (at 5 and 10 years of age) than in Trial 3 Arm D. The mean Eurocran dental index scores of the total material at 5, 8, and 10 years of age were 2.50, 2.60, and 2.26, and those of the 5YO index and GOSLON Yardstick were 2.77, 2.90, and 2.54, respectively. At age 10 years, 75.8% of the patients had had orthodontic treatment.

Conclusions

The results of these three trials do not provide evidence that one surgical method is superior to the others. The reliabilities of the dental indices were acceptable, and significant correlations existed between the indices at all ages. The reliability of the Eurocran palatal index was questionable.

Trial registration

ISRCTN29932826.