Abstract
Objective
This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the prevalence of dental anomalies in primary versus permanent dentition among individuals with non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) and to elucidate the differences in these anomalies between the two dentitions.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, LILACS, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Scopus. Studies included were those assessing dental anomalies in patients with CLP, with data on both primary and permanent dentition. The review adhered to PRISMA guidelines and included data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence.
Results
Seven retrospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of hyperdontia was higher in primary dentition (25%) compared to permanent dentition (12%), while hypodontia was more prevalent in permanent dentition (32%) than in primary dentition (12%). Patients with BCLP exhibited a greater prevalence of hypodontia in permanent dentition. Significant heterogeneity was observed across studies in terms of methodologies and sample sizes.
Conclusion
Dental anomalies in patients with CLP differ between primary and permanent dentition, with hyperdontia being more prevalent in primary dentition and hypodontia in permanent dentition. Variations in prevalence and types of anomalies between patients with UCLP and BCLP highlight the need for standardized diagnostic protocols. Future research should address methodological inconsistencies to improve the robustness of findings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
