To determine possible effects of unilateral alveolar cleft closure on internal nasal volume and external nasolabial surface.
Design
Retrospective, single-arm, cohort study.
Setting
Institutional, tertiary care.
Patients
Patients with complete unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (CUCLAP), who underwent closure of the alveolar cleft with autologous bone graft (ABG) at the age of 9–11 years, with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and/or three-dimensional (3D) stereophotogrammetry images taken before and one year after the ABG procedure.
Interventions
ABG-pocedure in patients with CUCLAP.
Main Outcome Measures
The influence of ABG on the internal and external nasal morphology.
Results
A total of 28 patients (21M/7F, 14R/14L) were divided into internal (CBCT) and external (3D-stereophotogrammetry) measurement subgroups. The external nasolabial surface showed a significant decrease of the angle alar curvature right–subnasale–alar curvature left (−1.99°; P = .02; 95% CI −2.61, −0.36) and an increase of the linear measurement between these points (+1.01 mm; P = .03; 95% CI: 0.11, 1.91). No significant differences were found when comparing the distance maps of the affected side with the non-affected side (P = .50, 95% CI: −0.20, 0.29).
Conclusions
Closure of the alveolar cleft in CUCLAP patients with ABG did not affect the internal nasal volume, but significantly affected the external nasal surface. The procedure resulted in the nose becoming wider because both alar curvatures moved caudally and laterally relative to the subnasale.
MosseyPACastillaE. Global Registry and Database on Craniofacial Anomalies: Report of a WHO Registry Meeting on Craniofacial Anomalies. World Health Organization; 2003:17, 18.
2.
Fleurke-RozemaJHvan de KampKBakkerMKPajkrtEBilardoCMSnijdersRJ. Prevalence, diagnosis and outcome of cleft lip with or without cleft palate in The Netherlands. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48(4):458–463. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.15834
3.
Vermeij-KeersCRozendaalAMLuijsterburgAJM, et al.Subphenotyping and classification of cleft lip and alveolus in adult unoperated patients: a new embryological approach. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(9):1267–1276. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665618767106
DixonMJMarazitaMLBeatyTHMurrayJC. Cleft lip and palate: understanding genetic and environmental influences. Nat Rev Genet. 2011;12(3):167–178. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2933
7.
Kuijpers-JagtmanAMLongRE. The influence of surgery and orthopedic treatment on maxillofacial growth and maxillary arch development in patients treated for orofacial clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2000;37(6):1–12. doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569_2000_037_0527_tiosao_2.0.c
8.
LatiefBSKuijpersMARStebelAKuijpers-JagtmanAMFudalejPS. Pattern of morphological variability in unrepaired unilateral clefts with and without cleft palate may suggest intrinsic growth deficiency. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:587859. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.587859
BugaighisIO'HigginsPTiddemanBMattickCBen AliOHobsonR. Three-dimensional geometric morphometrics applied to the study of children with cleft lip and/or palate from the North East of England. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(5):514–521. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp140
11.
Al-RudainyDJuXMehendaleFVAyoubA. Longitudinal 3D assessment of facial asymmetry in unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2019;56(4):495–501. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665618780108
12.
StasiakMWojtaszek-SłomińskaARacka-PilszakB. Current methods for secondary alveolar bone grafting assessment in cleft lip and palate patients - a systematic review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(4):578–585. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2019.01.013
13.
ThierensLAMKerckhofEDe RooNMC, et al.The effect of autologous alveolar bone grafting on nasolabial asymmetry in unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2020;31(6):1687–1691. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006393
14.
ZhangCBrugginkRBaanF, et al.A new segmentation algorithm for measuring CBCT images of nasal airway: a pilot study. PeerJ. 2019;7:e6246. doi:https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6246
15.
LübbersHTMedingerLKruseAGrätzKWMatthewsF. Precision and accuracy of the 3dMD photogrammetric system in craniomaxillofacial application. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21(3):763–767. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181d841f7
16.
FreihoferHPBorstlapWAKuijpers-JagtmanAM, et al.Timing and transplant materials for closure of alveolar clefts. A clinical comparison of 296 cases. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1993;21(4):143–148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s1010-5182(05)80102-7
17.
BeslPJMcKayND. A method for registration of 3-D shapes. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell.1992;14(2):239–256. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/34.121791
18.
MorosiniIACPeronAPLMCorreiaKRMorescaR. Study of face pleasantness using facial analysis in standardized frontal photographs. Dental Press Journal Orthod. 2012;17(5):24–34.
19.
MoreiraISuriSRossBTompsonBFisherDLouW. Soft-tissue profile growth in patients with repaired complete unilateral cleft lip and palate: a cephalometric comparison with normal controls at ages 7, 11, and 18 years. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145(3):341–358. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.11.018
20.
Dos InocentesRJMMarzano-RodriguesMNde EspíndolaGG, et al.Adults with unilateral cleft lip and palate present reduced internal nasal volumes: findings of a three-dimensional morphometric assessment in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography scans. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32(1):e15–e19. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006820
21.
GopinathVKSamsudinARMohd NoorSNFMohamed SharabHY. Facial profile and maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate children in the mixed dentition stage. Eur J Dent. 2017;11(1):76–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/ejd.ejd_238_16
22.
BaeyensWDaelemansALeloupTDe MeyA. Study of changes in nasal morphology in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate after secondary bone grafting measured with image analysis. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2006;40(6):345–351. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02844310601029928
23.
KauCHMedinaLEnglishJDXiaJGatenoJTeichgraberJ. A comparison between landmark and surface shape measurements in a sample of cleft lip and palate patients after secondary alveolar bone grafting. Orthodontics (Chic.). 2011;12(3):188–195.
24.
PimentaLAde Rezende BarbosaGLPrettiH, et al.Three-dimensional evaluation of nasopharyngeal airways of unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(3):736–739. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24895
25.
YamashinaATanimotoKSutthiprapapornPHayakawaY. The reliability of computed tomography (CT) values and dimensional measurements of the oropharyngeal region using cone beam CT: comparison with multidetector CT. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2008;37(5):245–251. doi:https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/45926904
26.
AlvesMJrBaratieriCMattosCT, et al.Is the airway volume being correctly analyzed?Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;141(5):657–661. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.11.019
27.
HeikeCLUpsonKStuhaugEWeinbergSM. 3D Digital stereophotogrammetry: a practical guide to facial image acquisition. Head Face Med. 2010;6(1):18. Published 2010 Jul 28. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-6-18
28.
van LoonBMaalTJPlooijJM, et al.3D Stereophotogrammetric assessment of pre- and postoperative volumetric changes in the cleft lip and palate nose. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(6):534–540. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2010.03.022
AinuzBYHallacRRKaneAA. Longitudinal composite 3D faces and facial growth trends in children 6-11 years of age using 3D cephalometric surface imaging. Ann Hum Biol. 2021;48(7-8):540–549. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03014460.2021.2012257. Epub 2021 Dec 20. PMID: 34930071).
31.
BronsSDarroudiANadaR, et al.Influence of involuntary facial expressions on reproducibility of 3D stereophotogrammetry in children with and without complete unilateral cleft lip and palate from 3 to 18 months of age. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23(3):1041–1050. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2520-0
32.
HänerSTKanavakisGMattheyFGkantidisN. Valid 3D surface superimposition references to assess facial changes during growth. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):16456. Published 2021 Aug 12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95942-3
33.
GibelliDMCappellaADolciC, et al.A longitudinal 3D investigation on facial similarity among two monozygotic twins in their first childhood: an application of the 3D-3D facial superimposition technique. Children (Basel). 2022;9(2):187. Published 2022 Feb 2. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/children9020187
