Effects of Palate Repair on Cranial Base and Maxillary Morphology in Patients With Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip and Palate.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Liu X;Liu X; Chen Z; Chen Z
  • Source:
    The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association [Cleft Palate Craniofac J] 2018 Nov; Vol. 55 (10), pp. 1367-1374. Date of Electronic Publication: 2018 Apr 03.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: SAGE Publications in Association with American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 9102566 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1545-1569 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 10556656 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Cleft Palate Craniofac J Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: 2018- : [Thousand Oaks, CA] : SAGE Publications in Association with American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association
      Original Publication: Pittsburgh, PA : The Association, [1991-
    • Subject Terms:
      Maxillofacial Development*; Cleft Lip/*surgery ; Cleft Palate/*surgery ; Skull Base/*growth & development; Adolescent ; Cephalometry ; Child ; China ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Retrospective Studies ; Skull Base/abnormalities ; Young Adult
    • Abstract:
      Objective: To identify the effects of palate repair on cranial base and maxillary morphology in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and to discover the relevance between cranial base and maxilla through cephalometric analysis.
      Design: Retrospective.
      Patients: Thirty-seven UCLP patients with operated lip (OL) and unoperated palate constituted OL group and were classified into 5 cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) stages. Thirty-seven UCLP patients with operated lip and palate (OLP) and 37 noncleft people with skeletal class I malocclusion were CVM- and sex-matched with the OL group as OLP group and control group, respectively. CVM stage I and II were combined into group 1, CVM stage III to V were combined into group 2.
      Interventions: Lateral cephalograms of all participants were obtained.
      Main Outcome Measures: Cephalometric analysis was employed, and data were compared among groups.
      Results: Length of posterior cranial base (Ba-S) of the OL group was shorter than controls in group 1; Ba-S and the ratio between length of posterior and anterior cranial base (Ba-S/S-N) of the OL and OLP groups were smaller than controls in group 2. No significant differences in cranial base were found between the OL and OLP groups. In group 1, patients of the OLP group showed smaller SNA, ANS-Ptm, and ANS-Ptm/S-N, and patients of the OL group showed smaller ANS-Ptm. In group 2, both OL and OLP groups had smaller sella-nasion-A point angle (SNA), projection distance between ANS and Ptm points on FH plane (ANS-Ptm), and the ratio between ANS-Ptm and anterior cranial base length (ANS-Ptm/S-N).
      Conclusions: Palate repair seems to have no obvious effects on cranial base morphology in patients with UCLP. Those patients with lip operated, whether cleft palate operated or not, tend to have a smaller length of maxilla sagittally and this deformity progresses with age.
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: cephalometry; craniofacial morphology; palate repair
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20180404 Date Completed: 20191025 Latest Revision: 20191025
    • Publication Date:
      20221213
    • Accession Number:
      10.1177/1055665618768544
    • Accession Number:
      29613840