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

Bartzela T, Katsaros C, Rønning E, Rizell S, Semb G, Bronkhorst E, Halazonetis D, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM - Clin Oral Investig (2011)

Bottom Line: 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).Follow-up of these patients until facial growth has ceased, which may elucidate components for improving treatment outcome.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Cleft Palate Craniofacial Unit, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, 309 Dentistry, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

ABSTRACT
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.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean tracings illustrating the craniofacial morphology in CBCLP from all three centers at a 6 and b 12 years (cross-sectional figures). Centers A Gothenburg (red), B Nijmegen (blue), and C Oslo (green)
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3400029&req=5

Fig5: Mean tracings illustrating the craniofacial morphology in CBCLP from all three centers at a 6 and b 12 years (cross-sectional figures). Centers A Gothenburg (red), B Nijmegen (blue), and C Oslo (green)

Mentions: The results of superimposition using the generalized Procrustes analysis of the 6- and 12-year-old group means are shown in Fig. 4a–c. Figure 5 visualizes the superimpositions of the mean tracings of all three centers at 6 (Fig. 5a) and 12 years (Fig. 5b).Fig. 4


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

Bartzela T, Katsaros C, Rønning E, Rizell S, Semb G, Bronkhorst E, Halazonetis D, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM - Clin Oral Investig (2011)

Mean tracings illustrating the craniofacial morphology in CBCLP from all three centers at a 6 and b 12 years (cross-sectional figures). Centers A Gothenburg (red), B Nijmegen (blue), and C Oslo (green)
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3400029&req=5

Fig5: Mean tracings illustrating the craniofacial morphology in CBCLP from all three centers at a 6 and b 12 years (cross-sectional figures). Centers A Gothenburg (red), B Nijmegen (blue), and C Oslo (green)
Mentions: The results of superimposition using the generalized Procrustes analysis of the 6- and 12-year-old group means are shown in Fig. 4a–c. Figure 5 visualizes the superimpositions of the mean tracings of all three centers at 6 (Fig. 5a) and 12 years (Fig. 5b).Fig. 4

Bottom Line: 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).Follow-up of these patients until facial growth has ceased, which may elucidate components for improving treatment outcome.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Cleft Palate Craniofacial Unit, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, 309 Dentistry, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

ABSTRACT
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.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus