An Intercenter Comparison of Nasolabial Appearance Including a Center Using Nasoalveolar Molding.

OBJECTIVE: To compare nasolabial appearance outcomes of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) in preadolescence from 4 cleft centers including a center using nasoalveolar molding (NAM) and primary nasal reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Four cleft centers in North America. PATIENTS: 135 subjects with repaired CUCLP. METHODS: Frontal and profile facial pictures were assessed using the Asher-McDade rating scale. Intra- and interrater reliability were tested using weighted Kappa statistics. Median scores by center were compared with Kruskal-Wallis statistics. RESULTS: Intrarater reliability scores were moderate to good. Interrater reliability scores were moderate. Significant differences ( P < .05) among centers were found. For nasal form, center G (median = 2.83) had better scores than centers C and D (C median = 3.33, D median = 3.17). For nose symmetry, center G had better scores (median = 2.33) than all other centers (B median = 2.67, C median = 2.83, D median = 2.83). For vermillion border, center G had better scores (median = 2.58) than centers B and C (B median = 3.17, C median = 3.17). For nasolabial profile, center G (median score = 2.67) had better scores than center C (median = 3.00). For total nasolabial score, center G (median = 2.67) had better scores than all other centers (B median = 2.83, C median = 3, D median = 2.83). CONCLUSION: The protocol followed by center G, the only center that performed NAM and primary nasal reconstruction, produced better results in all categories when compared to center C, the only center that did not perform presurgical orthopedics or lip/nose revisions. When compared to centers that performed traditional presurgical orthopedics and surgical revisions (B and D), center G was not consistently better in all categories. As with other uncontrolled, retrospective intercenter studies, it is not possible to attribute the outcomes to a specific protocol component.

An Intercenter Comparison of Dental Arch Relationships and Craniofacial Form Including a Center Using Nasoalveolar Molding.

OBJECTIVE: To compare dental arch relationship and craniofacial morphology of patients with CUCLP in pre-adolescence from five cleft centers including a center using NAM. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Five cleft centers in North America. PATIENTS: One hundred eighty-two subjects with repaired CUCLP from the five cleft centers participated in the craniofacial form study. One hundred forty-eight subjects from four of the five centers participated in the dental arch relationship study. METHODS: Digital dental models were assessed using the GOSLON Yardstick. Eighteen cephalometric measurements were performed. Measurement means, by center, were compared. Analysis of variance and Tukey-Kramer analysis were used to compare GOSLON scores and cephalometric measurements. RESULTS: The center that performed neither PSOT (including NAM) nor primary bone grafting exhibited the most favorable mean GOSLON score. The same center also showed the highest mean SNA, ANB, and ANS-N-Pg angles. However, the mean ANB and ANS-N-Pg angles were not significantly different from those of the center using NAM. No statistically significant differences were seen for mandibular prominence, vertical dimensions, or dental inclinations. The center with NAM also showed a significantly smaller nasoform angle than two of the four other centers. CONCLUSION: The centers that used NAM and other forms of PSOT did not have better dental arch relationships or craniofacial morphology compared with the centers that performed only primary lip repair. However, this study was not designed to investigate the cause-and-effect relationship between specific outcomes and particular features of those protocols.

Accuracy of reconstructed images from cone-beam computed tomography scans.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to determine whether 2-dimensional (2D) images produced from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images taken with an iCAT scanner (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, Pa) can substitute for traditional cephalograms. METHODS: Lateral and frontal cephalograms were taken of a radiographic phantom with known dimensions. Landmarks on the 2D images were traced and measured manually by 2 examiners and then digitally in Dolphin 10 (Dolphin Imaging Sciences, Chatsworth, Calif) by the same examiners. A CBCT scan was taken of the phantom, and orthogonal and perspective projections were created from the scans. Frontal and lateral cephalograms were created by using the 3-dimensional function in Dolphin 10, digitized into Dolphin, and traced by the same 2 examiners. Linear measurements were compared to assess the accuracy of the generated images from the CBCT scans. RESULTS: Measurements on the orthogonal projections were not significantly different from the actual dimensions of the phantom, and measurements on the perspective projections were highly correlated with those taken on standard 2D films. CONCLUSIONS: By constructing a perspective lateral cephalogram from a CBCT scan, one can replicate the inherent magnification of a conventional 2D lateral cephalogram with high accuracy.