A longitudinal three-center study of craniofacial morphology at 6 and 12 years of age in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate.

In this longitudinal study, the craniofacial morphology and evaluated soft tissue profile changes, at 6 and 12 years of age in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (CBCLP) were compared. Lateral cephalograms from 148 patients with CBCLP, treated consecutively at three European cleft centers, Gothenburg (n (A) = 37), Nijmegen (n (B) = 26), and Oslo (n (C) = 85), were evaluated. Eighteen hard tissue and ten soft tissue landmarks were digitized. Paired t test, Pearson's correlation coefficients, and multiple regression models were applied for statistical analysis. ANOVA and Tukey-B, as a post hoc test, were used to evaluate the increments and compare centers. Hard and soft tissue data were superimposed using the generalized Procrustes analysis. For Nijmegen, the increments of the variables SNA, ANB, SN-NL, SN-ML, NL-ML, Snss, and Snpg were significantly different than the two other centers (p = 0.041 to <0.001). SNPg increments were significantly different between Nijmegen and Oslo (p = 0.002). The three cleft centers followed different treatment protocols, but the main differences in craniofacial morphology until 12 years of age were the growth pattern and the maxillary and upper incisor variables. Follow-up of these patients until facial growth has ceased, which may elucidate components for improving treatment outcome.

A new yardstick for rating dental arch relationship in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate.

OBJECTIVE: To develop yardsticks for assessment of dental arch relationship in young individuals with repaired complete bilateral cleft lip and palate appropriate to different stages of dental development. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven cleft team orthodontists from five countries worked on the projects for 4 days. A total of 776 sets of standardized plaster models from 411 patients with operated complete bilateral cleft lip and palate were available for the exercise. STATISTICS: The interexaminer reliability was calculated using weighted kappa statistics. RESULTS: The interrater weighted kappa scores were between .74 and .92, which is in the "good" to "very good" categories. CONCLUSIONS: Three bilateral cleft lip and palate yardsticks for different developmental stages of the dentition were made: one for the deciduous dentition (6-year-olds' yardstick), one for early mixed dentition (9-year-olds' yardstick), and one for early permanent dentition (12-year-olds' yardstick).

Tooth agenesis patterns in bilateral cleft lip and palate.

Individuals with cleft lip and palate present significantly more dental anomalies, even outside the cleft area, than do individuals without clefts. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of tooth agenesis and patterns of hypodontia in a large sample of patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP). Serial panoramic radiographs (the first radiograph was taken at 10.5-13.5 yr of age) of 240 patients with BCLP (172 male patients, 68 female patients) were examined. Third molars were not included in the evaluation. Agenesis of at least one tooth was present in 59.8% of patients. Upper laterals and upper and lower second premolars were missing most frequently. Using the tooth agenesis code (TAC), 52 different agenesis patterns were identified, of which simultaneous agenesis of 12, 22, 15, 25, 35, and 45 was the most frequent pattern. Nine of the 240 patients showed combined BCLP and oligodontia.

A longitudinal three-center study of dental arch relationship in patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate.

OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate longitudinally the dental arch relationships from 4.5 to 13.5 years of age with the Bauru-BCLP Yardstick in a large sample of patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP). DESIGN: Retrospective longitudinal intercenter outcome study. PATIENTS: Dental casts of 204 consecutive patients with complete BCLP were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 years of age. All models were identified only by random identification numbers. SETTING: Three cleft palate centers with different treatment protocols. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dental arch relationships were categorized with the Bauru-BCLP yardstick. Increments for each interval (from 6 to 9 years, 6 to 12 years, and 9 to 12 years) were analyzed by logistic and linear regression models. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in outcome measures between the centers at age 12 or at age 9. At age 6, center B showed significantly better results (p=.027), but this difference diminished as the yardstick score for this group increased over time (linear regression analysis), the difference with the reference category (center C, boys) for the intervals 6 to 12 and 9 to 12 years being 10.4% (p=.041) and 12.9% (p=.009), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite different treatment protocols, dental arch relationships in the three centers were comparable in final scores at age 9 and 12 years. Delaying hard palate closure and employing infant orthopedics did not appear to be advantageous in the long run. Premaxillary osteotomy employed in center B appeared to be associated with less favorable development of the dental arch relationship between 9 and 12 years.

Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 6. Dental arch relationships in 5 year-olds.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Good dentofacial growth is a major goal in the treatment of unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). The aim was to evaluate dental arch relationships at age 5 years after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP. DESIGN: Three parallel randomised clinical trials were undertaken as an international multi-centre study by 10 cleft teams in five countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the UK. METHODS: Three different surgical procedures for primary palatal repair (Arms B, C, D) were tested against a common procedure (Arm A) in the total cohort of 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP. Study models of 418 patients (273 boys) at the mean age of 5.1 years (range = 4.8-7.0) were available. Dental arch relationships were assessed using the 5-year index by a blinded panel of 16 orthodontists. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess reliability. The trials were tested statistically with t- and Chi-square tests. RESULTS: Good-to-very good levels of intra- and interrater reliability were obtained (0.71-0.94 and 0.70-0.87). Comparisons within each trial showed no statistically significant differences in the mean 5-year index scores or their distributions between the common method and the local team protocol. The mean index scores varied from 2.52 (Trial 2, Arm C) to 2.94 (Trial 3, Arm D). CONCLUSION: The results of the three trials do not provide statistical evidence that one technique is better than the others. Further analysis of the possible influence of individual surgical skill and learning curve are being pursued in this dataset. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN29932826.

Scandcleft randomised trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: 7. Occlusion in 5 year-olds according to the Huddart and Bodenham index.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Good dentofacial development and good occlusion are main goals in the treatment of UCLP. The aim was to evaluate dental occlusion at age 5 years with the Huddart and Bodenham index after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP. DESIGN: Three parallel randomised controlled trials were undertaken as an international multicentre study by 10 cleft teams in five countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the UK. METHODS: Three different surgical procedures for primary palatal repair (Arms B, C, and D) were tested against a common procedure (Arm A) in the total cohort of 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP. Dental casts of 418 patients (272 boys, 146 girls), at the mean age of 5.1 years (range =4.7-6.9) were blindly assessed by 10 orthodontists with the original Huddart and Bodenham index. The main outcome measure was dental occlusion. RESULTS: The inter- and intra-examiner reliability was good-to-excellent (0.61-0.94; 0.66-1.0, respectively). The mean total scores (+2 to -18) varied from -5.56 (Trial 2C) to -7.21 (Trial 3D). The mean anterior scores (+2 to -6) varied from -1.66 (Trial 2C) to -2.56 (Trial 3A). The mean posterior cleft-side scores (0 to -6) varied from -3.24 (Trial 3A) to -3.82 (Trial 3D) and the mean non-cleft-side scores (0 to -6) varied from -0.60 (Trial 2C) to -1.30 (Trial 3A); however, no significant differences were found within the trials. CONCLUSION: There was no statistical evidence of a difference in occlusion between the two surgical methods in each trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN29932826.