Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Palatal morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: Association with infant cleft dimensions and timing of hard palate repair

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Botticelli, Susanna ; Küseler, Annelise ; Mølsted, Kirsten ; Ovsenik, Maja ; Nørholt, Sven Erik ; Dalstra, Michel ; Cattaneo, Paolo M ; Pedersen, Thomas Klit. / Palatal morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients : Association with infant cleft dimensions and timing of hard palate repair. I: Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research. 2019 ; Bind 22, Nr. 4. s. 270-280.

Bibtex

@article{bc6fc076a1b54cf1a56cf9356b484ea8,
title = "Palatal morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients: Association with infant cleft dimensions and timing of hard palate repair",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of cleft severity and timing of hard palate repair on palatal dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) children.SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Single-centre analysis within a multicenter RCT of primary surgery; 122 UCLP randomized to early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months or delayed hard palate closure (DHPC) at 36 months; 28 frequency-matched controls.METHODS: Linear measurements of palatal height, width and length were performed on 116 digital models of UCLP subjects (8.21 years, SD = 0.53) and 28 models of non-cleft individuals (8.44 years SD = 0.72). Cleft dimensions at infancy (mean 1.8 months) were considered. In a pilot study, shell-to-shell distances between the 3D cleft palate objects and a reference mesh were calculated and differences between the groups assessed. Morphological differences were visualized using colour mapping.RESULTS: Compared to controls, UCLP subjects presented a higher palate at the level of the anterior scar (P = 0.002), but generally a lower palate in the middle region (P < 0.001). Comparing UCLP subgroups, the DHPC subjects showed a flatter palate posteriorly (P = 0.048) and the EHPC group exhibited more transversal constriction (P = 0.003 at M1 level). 3D analysis revealed a shallower palate in the DHPC group both in the middle (P = 0.002) and the posterior part (P = 0.008). Anterior cleft severity correlated negatively with palatal height (P = 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral cleft lip and palate palates differ from controls in width and height. DHPC may represent an advantage for the transversal dimension, but a disadvantage for palatal height. Infant cleft dimensions partially explain differences in palatal height.",
keywords = "Child, Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate, Humans, Infant, Lip, Palate, Palate, Hard/surgery, Pilot Projects",
author = "Susanna Botticelli and Annelise K{\"u}seler and Kirsten M{\o}lsted and Maja Ovsenik and N{\o}rholt, {Sven Erik} and Michel Dalstra and Cattaneo, {Paolo M} and Pedersen, {Thomas Klit}",
note = "{\circledC} 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1111/ocr.12318",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "270--280",
journal = "Clinical orthodontics and research",
issn = "1601-6335",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Palatal morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients

T2 - Association with infant cleft dimensions and timing of hard palate repair

AU - Botticelli, Susanna

AU - Küseler, Annelise

AU - Mølsted, Kirsten

AU - Ovsenik, Maja

AU - Nørholt, Sven Erik

AU - Dalstra, Michel

AU - Cattaneo, Paolo M

AU - Pedersen, Thomas Klit

N1 - © 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

PY - 2019/11

Y1 - 2019/11

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of cleft severity and timing of hard palate repair on palatal dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) children.SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Single-centre analysis within a multicenter RCT of primary surgery; 122 UCLP randomized to early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months or delayed hard palate closure (DHPC) at 36 months; 28 frequency-matched controls.METHODS: Linear measurements of palatal height, width and length were performed on 116 digital models of UCLP subjects (8.21 years, SD = 0.53) and 28 models of non-cleft individuals (8.44 years SD = 0.72). Cleft dimensions at infancy (mean 1.8 months) were considered. In a pilot study, shell-to-shell distances between the 3D cleft palate objects and a reference mesh were calculated and differences between the groups assessed. Morphological differences were visualized using colour mapping.RESULTS: Compared to controls, UCLP subjects presented a higher palate at the level of the anterior scar (P = 0.002), but generally a lower palate in the middle region (P < 0.001). Comparing UCLP subgroups, the DHPC subjects showed a flatter palate posteriorly (P = 0.048) and the EHPC group exhibited more transversal constriction (P = 0.003 at M1 level). 3D analysis revealed a shallower palate in the DHPC group both in the middle (P = 0.002) and the posterior part (P = 0.008). Anterior cleft severity correlated negatively with palatal height (P = 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral cleft lip and palate palates differ from controls in width and height. DHPC may represent an advantage for the transversal dimension, but a disadvantage for palatal height. Infant cleft dimensions partially explain differences in palatal height.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of cleft severity and timing of hard palate repair on palatal dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) children.SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Single-centre analysis within a multicenter RCT of primary surgery; 122 UCLP randomized to early hard palate closure (EHPC) at 12 months or delayed hard palate closure (DHPC) at 36 months; 28 frequency-matched controls.METHODS: Linear measurements of palatal height, width and length were performed on 116 digital models of UCLP subjects (8.21 years, SD = 0.53) and 28 models of non-cleft individuals (8.44 years SD = 0.72). Cleft dimensions at infancy (mean 1.8 months) were considered. In a pilot study, shell-to-shell distances between the 3D cleft palate objects and a reference mesh were calculated and differences between the groups assessed. Morphological differences were visualized using colour mapping.RESULTS: Compared to controls, UCLP subjects presented a higher palate at the level of the anterior scar (P = 0.002), but generally a lower palate in the middle region (P < 0.001). Comparing UCLP subgroups, the DHPC subjects showed a flatter palate posteriorly (P = 0.048) and the EHPC group exhibited more transversal constriction (P = 0.003 at M1 level). 3D analysis revealed a shallower palate in the DHPC group both in the middle (P = 0.002) and the posterior part (P = 0.008). Anterior cleft severity correlated negatively with palatal height (P = 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral cleft lip and palate palates differ from controls in width and height. DHPC may represent an advantage for the transversal dimension, but a disadvantage for palatal height. Infant cleft dimensions partially explain differences in palatal height.

KW - Child

KW - Cleft Lip

KW - Cleft Palate

KW - Humans

KW - Infant

KW - Lip

KW - Palate

KW - Palate, Hard/surgery

KW - Pilot Projects

U2 - 10.1111/ocr.12318

DO - 10.1111/ocr.12318

M3 - Journal article

VL - 22

SP - 270

EP - 280

JO - Clinical orthodontics and research

JF - Clinical orthodontics and research

SN - 1601-6335

IS - 4

ER -

ID: 59409875