To evaluate the posterior superior alveolar canal (PSAC) in individuals with cleft lip and palate (CLP) by comparing them with individuals with no cleft lip and palate (NC) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Setting
This is a cross-sectional, analytical study with a prospective sample.
Patients, Participants
CBCT scans of 29 individuals with no cleft and palate (Group I) and 29 individuals with cleft lip and palate (Group II) were used.
Interventions
PSAC was evaluated and compared for its position, diameter, and distance between the individuals with CLP and NC using CBCT scans.
Results
The mean age of individuals in Group I and II were 12.93 and 11.82 years, respectively. The distribution of individuals based on gender comprised of 51.7% males and 48.3% females in both the study groups. PSAC was present in both right and left maxillary sinus in 100% of the study subjects of Group I and Group II. The most prevalent position of PSAC in Group I and Group II was on the lower third and middle third of lateral wall of maxillary sinus, respectively. The mean diameter was higher in Group II (1.2962 mm) when compared to Group I (1.0897 mm) which showed statistically significant value (P = .008).
Conclusion
The promising results obtained from the present study demonstrates the importance of knowing the precise anatomical location of the PSAC in individuals with cleft lip and palate by using CBCT which is reliable, less time consuming and cost effective imaging tool.
LotfallahAShahidiSOdelbergSWDarrA. Cleft lip and palate. InnovAiT. 2023;16(4):165-170.
3.
SinghDSinghSPUtrejaAJenaAVermaSVermaRK. Epidemiology of cleft lip and palate among infants born in Chandigarh. J Postgrad Med Educ Res. 2022;56(1):13-20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/06-120.1
4.
CooperMERatayJSMarazitaML. Asian oral-facial cleft birth prevalence. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2006;43(5):580-589.
CompagnucciCMartinusKGriffinJDepewMJ. Programmed cell death not as sledgehammer but as chisel: apoptosis in normal and abnormal craniofacial patterning and development. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021;9(1):717404. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/05-167
7.
MosseyPALittleJMungerRGDixonMJShawWC. Cleft lip and palate. Lancet. 2009;374(9703):1773-1785.
RoguzińskaSPelcAMikulewiczM. Orthodontic-care burden for patients with unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate. Dent Med Probl. 2020;57(4):411-416.
10.
de GittinsEVCDYaedúRYFLaurisJRPRubiraCMFPaginBSCRubira-BullenIRF. Cleft lip and palate cause large variations in size and location of the posterior superior alveolar canal. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(7):4451-4458. doi:https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2018.48.2.113
11.
Paradowska-StolarzAMikulewiczMDuś-IlnickaI. Current concepts and challenges in the treatment of cleft lip and palate patients-A. Comprehensive review. J Pers Med. 2022;12(12):2089. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e318184326e
12.
RaghavanUVijayadevVRaoDUllasG. Postoperative management of cleft lip and palate surgery. Facial Plast Surg. 2018;34(6):605-611. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.979345
13.
HarjunpääRAlaluusuaSLeikolaJHeliövaaraA. Le fort I osteotomy in cleft patients: maxillary advancement and velopharyngeal function. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(12):1868-1874. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656241261839
14.
DinuCAlmășanOHedeșiuMArmenceaGBăciuțGBranSOprișDVăcărașSIștoanV BăciuțM. The usefulness of cone beam computed tomography according to age in cleft lip and palate. J Med Life. 2022;15(9):1136-1142. doi:10.25122/jml-2022-0209
15.
Lopes de Rezende BarbosaGPimentaLAPrettiHGoldenBARobertsJDrakeAF. Difference in maxillary sinus volumes of patients with cleft lip and palate. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2014;78(12):2234-2236. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2014.10.019
16.
QuereshyFABarnumGDemkoC, Horan M, Palomo JM, Baur DA, Jannuzzi J.Use of cone beam computed tomography to volumetrically assess alveolar cleft defects—preliminary results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70(1):188-191. doi:10.1016/j.joms.2011.01.027
17.
GüncüGNYildirimYDWangHLTözümTF. Location of posterior superior alveolar artery and evaluation of maxillary sinus anatomy with computerized tomography: a clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(10):1164-1167. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02071.x
18.
FerlinRPaginBSCYaedúRYF. Evaluation of canalis sinuosus in individuals with cleft lip and palate: a cross-sectional study using cone beam computed tomography. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;25(3):337-343. doi:10.1007/s10006-020-00919-7
19.
KadhimSS. The accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography in the evaluation of boney support of teeth among patients with a unilateral cleft of lip and palate among Iraqi population. J Bagh Coll Dent. 2019;31(2):60-64. doi:https://doi.org/10.26477/jbcd.v31i2.2625
20.
MardingerOAbbaMHirshbergASchwartz-AradD. Prevalence, diameter and course of the maxillary intraosseous vascular canal with relation to sinus augmentation procedure: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36(8):735-738. doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2007.05.005
21.
Danesh-SaniSAMovahedAElChaarESChong ChanKAmintavakoliN. Radiographic evaluation of maxillary Sinus lateral wall and posterior superior alveolar artery anatomy: a cone-beam computed tomographic study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017;19(1):151-160. doi:10.1111/cid.12426
22.
AbuhijlehEAydemirHToygar-MemikoğluU. Three-dimensional craniofacial morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Oral Sci. 2014;56(2):165-172. doi:10.2334/josnusd.56.165
23.
OberoiSChigurupatiRVargervikK. Morphologic and management characteristics of individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate who required maxillary advancement. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008;45(1):42-49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1597/06-053.1
24.
WatanabeMWatanabeATakanoNSaitoCShibaharaT. Morphologic evaluation for safe Le fort I osteotomy in cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(5):728-735. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665618757368
25.
EllaBSédaratCDa Costa NobleR, Normand E, Lauverjat Y, Siberchicot F, Caix P, Zwetyenga N.Vascular connections of the lateral wall of the sinus: surgical effect in sinus augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(6):1047-1052.
26.
DrakeRLVoglWMitchellAWM. Gray’s anatomy for students. 2nd ed. Elsevier; 2009.
27.
SolarPGeyerhoferUTraxlerHWindischAUlmCWatzekG. Blood supply to the maxillary sinus relevant to sinus floor elevation procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1999;10(1):34-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100105.x
JungJYimJHKwonYD, Al-Nawas B, Kim GT, Choi BJ, Lee DW.A radiographic study of the position and prevalence of the maxillary arterial endosseous anastomosis using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26(6):1273-1278.
30.
NahaiFRWilliamsJKBursteinFDMartinJThomasJ. The management of cleft lip and palate: pathways for treatment and longitudinal assessment. Semin Plast Surg. 2005;19(4):275-285. doi:https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-925900
Varela-CentellesPLoira-GagoMSeoane-RomeroJMTakkoucheBMonteiroLSeoaneJ. Detection of the posterior superior alveolar artery in the lateral sinus wall using computed tomography/cone beam computed tomography: a prevalence meta-analysis study and systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44(11):1405-1410. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2015.07.001
33.
ElianNWallaceSChoSCJalboutZNFroumS. Distribution of the maxillary artery as it relates to sinus floor augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20(5):784-787.
34.
DemirtasOKalabalikFDaneAAktanAMCiftciETarimE. Does unilateral cleft lip and palate affect the maxillary sinus volume?Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018;55(2):168-172. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1055665617726991
35.
ErdurOUcarFISekerciAECelikogluMBuyukSK. Maxillary sinus volumes of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;79(10):1741-1744. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2015.08.003
36.
da SilvaCSVSantaellaNGBonattoMS, Ricci VLE, Fabio AAM, Meireless A.The relation between maxillary sinuses and cleft lip and palate. J. Health Sci. 2022;23(3):162-166.
37.
IlgüyDIlgüyMDolekogluSFisekciogluE. Evaluation of the posterior superior alveolar artery and the maxillary sinus with CBCT. Braz Oral Res. 2013;27(5):431-437. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242013000500007
38.
AminNOhashiYChibaJYoshidaSTakanoY. Alterations in vascular pattern of the developing palate in normal and spontaneous cleft palate mouse embryos. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1994;31(5):332-344.
39.
KeceliHGDursunEDolgunA, Velasco-Torres M, Karaoglulari S, Ghoreishi R, Sinjab K, Sheridan RA, Kubilius M, Tözüm MD, et al.Evaluation of single tooth loss to maxillary sinus and surrounding bone anatomy with cone-beam computed tomography: a multicenter study. Implant Dent. 2017;26(5):690-699.
40.
RosanoGTaschieriSGaudyJFWeinsteinTDel FabbroM. Maxillary sinus vascular anatomy and its relation to sinus lift surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22(7):711-715. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02045.x
41.
NicolieloLFVan DesselJJacobsRMartensWLambrichtsIRubira-BullenIR. Presurgical CBCT assessment of maxillary neurovascularization in relation to maxillary sinus augmentation procedures and posterior implant placement. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(9):915-924. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-014-1309-3
42.
WaingadeMSalunkheSMedikeriRS. Assessment of position of posterior superior alveolar artery in relation to maxillary sinus using cone-beam computed tomography. J. Orofac. Sci. 2021;13(2):105-113. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/jofs.jofs_57_21
43.
GodilAZDevadigaTJSupnekarSCKaziAIWadwanSADugalR. Position of posterior superior alveolar artery in relation to the maxillary sinus using cone beam computed tomography in Indian sub-population. J Oral Med Oral Surg. 2021;27(3):34. doi:https://doi.org/10.1051/mbcb/2021007
44.
VaseghZValizadehSSafiYGhazizadeh AhsaieMMohammadiY. Evaluation of posterior superior alveolar canal on cone beam computed tomography images. J Dent Sch. 2020;37(2):62-66.
KangSJShinSIHerrYKwonYHKimGTChungJH. Anatomical structures in the maxillary sinus related to lateral sinus elevation: a cone beam computed tomographic analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(Suppl A100):75-81. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02378.x
47.
KurtMKurşunEAlparslanE. Posterior superior alveolar artery evaluation in a Turkish subpopulation using CBCT. Clin Dent Res. 2014;38(1):12-19.
48.
FreitasJA de SGaribDGOliveiraMLaurisR de CMCAlmeidaALPF deNevesLTTrindade-SuedamIKYaedúRYFSoaresSPintoJHN.Rehabilitative treatment of cleft lip and palate: experience of the hospital for rehabilitation of craniofacial anomalies-USP (HRAC-USP)–part 2: pediatric dentistry and orthodontics. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012;20(2):268-281. doi:https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572012000200024
49.
YangSMKyeSB. Location of maxillary intraosseous vascular anastomosis based on the tooth position and height of the residual alveolar bone: computed tomographic analysis. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2014;44(2):50-56. doi:https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2014.44.2.50
50.
ParkWHChoiSYKimCS. Study on the position of the posterior superior alveolar artery in relation to the performance of the maxillary sinus bone graft procedure in a Korean population. J Korean Assoc Oral MaxillofacSurg. 2012;38(2):71-77. doi:https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2012.38.2.71
51.
Comparison between condyles in affected and unaffected sides of patients with and without clefts by cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Orthod Rehabil. 2024;15(2):48-56.
