To demonstrate craniofacial developmental patterns in repaired cleft lip and cleft palate (CLP).
Design
Retrospective, longitudinal.
Setting
Center for Craniofacial Disorders, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Sample
Males aged 9 to 17 years: 13 noncleft (NC) Class I occlusion (NCC1); 13 NC Class III malocclusion (NCC3); 12 CLP Class I occlusion (CLPC1); and 15 CLP Class III malocclusion (CLPC3).
Main Outcome Measures
Form changes (ages 10, 13, and 16 years), using finite-element scaling analysis.
Results
NCC1, 10 to 13 interval: 30% size increase in upper midface (p < .05), mental region (p < .01), mandibular body (p < .05); 13 to 16 interval: 10% to 35% size increase in bimaxillary region and ramus (p < .01). NCC3, 10 to 13 interval: 10% to 40% size increase in posterior cranial base, upper midface, and mandible (p < .05); 13 to 16 interval: 10% to 30% size increase in bimaxillary region (p < .01), especially ramus. CLPC1, 10 to 13 interval: 10% to 15% size increase in posterior cranial base (p < .01), midface (p < .05), and mandibular ramus (p < .05); 13 to 16 interval: 8% to 20% size increase in upper midface (p < .01), lower midface (p < .05), and mandible (p < .05). CLPC3, 10 to 13 interval: no significant changes; 13 to 16 interval: upper midface and cranial base show nonsignificant size decreases, but ramus showed size increase.
Conclusions
Noncleft and CLP Class 1 occlusion groups show similar craniofacial growth patterns. Noncleft Class III groups show excessive cranial and mandibular growth. Class III malocclusion in CLP patients is associated with clinically deficient craniomaxillary growth. Growth guidance may be indicated in children with CLP with unfavorable craniofacial growth patterns.
AndersonD.PopovichF.Relation of cranial base flexure to cranial form and mandibular position.Am J Phys Anthropol.1983; 61: 181–187.
2.
BaccettiT.McGillJ.S.FranchiL.McNamaraJ.A.JrTollaroI.Skeletal effects of early treatment of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion and facemask therapy.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1998; 113: 333–343.
3.
BooksteinF.L.Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
4.
CheverudJ.M.HartmanS.E.RichtsmeierJ.T.AtchleyW.R.A quantitative genetic analysis of localized morphology in mandibles of inbred mice using finite element scaling analysis.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol.1991; 11: 122–137.
5.
CohenM.M.JrWalkerG.F.PhillipsC.A morphometric analysis of the craniofacial configuration in achondroplasia.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol Suppl.1985; 1: 139–165.
6.
DahlE.Craniofacial morphology in congenital clefts of the lip and palate: an x-ray cephalometric study of young adult males.Acta Odont Scand.1970; 28(Suppl 57): 11.
7.
DolciG.CordaroL.CordaroM.The morphology of the base of the cranium in prognathism. A cephalometric study of adult patients.Minerva Stomatol.1991; 40: 761–768.
8.
FriedeH.MorganP.Growth of the vomero-premaxillary suture in children with bilateral cleft lip and palate. A histological and roentgencephalometric study.Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg.1976; 10: 45–55.
9.
FriedeH.PruzanskyS.Long-term effects of premaxillary setback on facial skeletal profile in complete bilateral cleft lip and palate.Cleft Palate J.1985; 22: 97–105.
10.
GraberT.M.A cephalometric analysis of the developmental pattern and facial morphology in cleft Palate.Angle Orthod.1949; 19: 91–100.
11.
HammondA.B.SmahelZ.MossM.L.Finite element method analysis of craniofacial morphology in unilateral cleft lip and palate prior to palatoplasty.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol.1993; 13: 47–56.
12.
HamwayT.A.Pangrazio-KulbershV.Surgical correction of skeletal Class III malocclusions using cranial base length (corrected and uncorrected) as a reference.Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg.1995; 10: 27–33.
13.
HaskellB.S.The human chin and its relationship to mandibular morphology.Angle Orthod.1979; 49: 153–166.
14.
HayA.D.AyoubA.F.MoosK.F.SinghG.D.Euclidean distance matrix analysis of surgical changes in prepubertal craniofacial microsomia patients treated with an inverted L osteotomy.Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2000; 37: 497–502.
15.
HorowitzS.L.Graf-PinthusB.BettexM.VinkkaH.GerstmanL.J.Factor analysis of craniofacial morphology in cleft lip and palate in man.Arch Oral Biol.1976; 21: 465–472.
16.
HuangC.S.WangW.I.LiouE.J.ChenY.R.ChenP.K.NoordhoffM.S.Effects of cheiloplasty on maxillary dental arch development in infants with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate.Cleft Palate Craniofac J.2002; 39: 513–516.
17.
HurmerintaK.RahkamoA.HaavikkoK.Comparison between cephalometric classification methods for sagittal jaw relationships.Eur J Oral Sci.1997; 105: 221–227.
18.
KimY.H.A Comparative Cephalometric Study of the Relationship of Facial Structures in Normal and Cleft Palate Children.Rochester, NY: University of Rochester;1958. Thesis.
19.
KrogmanW.M.A longitudinal study of the craniofacial growth pattern in children with clefts as compared to normal, birth to six years.Cleft Palate J.1975; 12: 59–84.
20.
LeleS.RichtsmeierJ.T.Euclidean distance matrix analysis: a coordinate-free approach for comparing biological shapes using landmark data.Am J Phys Anthropol.1991; 86: 415–427.
21.
LeleS.RichtsmeierJ.T.Euclidean distance matrix analysis: confidence intervals for form and growth differences.Am J Phys Anthropol.1995; 98: 73–86.
22.
LevinH.S.A cephalometric analysis of cleft palate deficiencies in the middle third of the face.Angle Orthod.1963; 33: 186–194.
23.
LintonJ.L.Comparative study of diagnostic measures in borderline surgical cases of unilateral cleft lip and palate and noncleft Class III malocclusions.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1998; 113: 526–537.
24.
LozanoffS.Comparison between two finite-element modelling methods for measuring change in craniofacial form.Anat Rec.1990; 227: 380–386.
25.
MardiaK.V.Statistical shape analysis and its applications. In: ChaplainM.A.J.SinghG.D.McLachlanJ.C., eds. On Growth and Form: Spatio-Temporal Patterning in Biology.New York: John Wiley and Sons;1999: 337–353.
26.
MartoneV.D.EnlowD.H.HansM.G.BroadbentB.H.JrOyenO.Class I and Class III malocclusion sub-groupings related to headform type.Angle Orthod.1992; 62: 35–42.
27.
McAlarneyM.E.ChiuW.K.Comparison of numeric techniques in the analysis of cleft palate dental arch form change.Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1997; 34: 281–291.
28.
MermigosJ.FullC.A.AndreasenG.Protraction of the maxillofacial complex.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1990; 98: 47–55.
29.
MossM.L.The functional matrix hypothesis revisited. 4. The epigenetic antithesis and the resolving synthesis.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1997; 112: 410–417.
30.
PadwaB.L.SonisA.BagheriS.MullikenJ.B.Children with repaired bilateral cleft lip/palate: effect of age at premaxillary osteotomy on facial growth.Plast Reconstr Surg.1999; 104: 1261–1269.
31.
PaeE.K.LoweA.A.FleethamJ.A.A thin-plate spline analysis of the face and tongue in obstructive sleep apnea patients.Clin Oral Investig.1997; 1: 178–184.
32.
PolleyJ.W.FigueroaA.A.Maxillary distraction osteogenesis with rigid external distraction.Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am.1999; 7: 15–28.
33.
RenY.F.IsbergA.HenningssonG.LarsonO.Tongue posture in cleft palate patients with a pharyngeal flap.Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg.1992; 26: 307–312.
34.
RichtsmeierJ.T.Comparative study of normal, Crouzon, and Apert craniofacial morphology using finite element scaling analysis.Am J Phys Anthropol.1987; 74: 473–493.
35.
RichtsmeierJ.T.LeleS.Analysis of craniofacial growth in Crouzon syndrome using landmark data.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol.1990; 10: 39–62.
36.
RohlfF.J.SliceD.Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks.Syst Zool.1990; 39: 40–59.
37.
RossR.B.Cranial base in children with lip and palate clefts.Cleft Palate J.1965; 2: 157–165.
38.
SarhanO.A.Sella-Nasion line revisited.J Oral Rehabil.1995; 22: 905–908.
39.
SchudyF.Superimposition and structural analysis.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1996; 109: 180–192.
40.
SgourosS.NatarajanK.HockleyA.D.GoldinJ.H.WakeM.Skull base growth in childhood.Pediatr Neurosurg.1999; 31: 259–268.
41.
ShankerS.NganP.WadeD.BeckM.YiuC.HaggU.WeiS.H.Cephalometric A point changes during and after maxillary protraction and expansion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1996; 110: 423–430.
42.
SinghG.D.ClarkW.J.Soft tissue changes in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusions treated using Twin Block appliances: finite-element scaling analysis.Eur J Orthod.2003; 25: 225–230.
43.
SinghG.D.KutcipalE.McNamaraJ.A.Jr. Deformations of the midfacial complex in twins with orofacial clefts.Cleft Palate Craniofac. J.2003; 40: 403–408.
44.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Allometry of the cranial base in prepubertal Korean subjects with Class III malocclusions. Finite-element morphometry.Angle Orthod.1999a; 69: 507–514.
45.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Comparison of mandibular morphology in Korean and European-American children with Class III malocclusions using finite-element morphometry.J Orthod.2000a; 27: 135–142.
46.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Finite element analysis of the cranial base in subjects with Class III malocclusion.Br J Orthod.1997a; 24: 103–112.
47.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Finite-element morphometry of soft tissue morphology in subjects with untreated Class III malocclusions.Angle Orthod.1999b; 69: 215–224.
48.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Finite element morphometry of soft tissues in prepubertal Korean and European-Americans with Class III malocclusions.Arch Oral Biol.1999c; 44: 429–436.
49.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Finite element morphometry of the midfacial complex in subjects with Angle's Class III malocclusions.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol.1997b; 17: 112–120.
50.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Mandibular morphology in subjects with Class III malocclusions: finite-element morphometry.Angle Orthod.1998; 68: 409–418.
51.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Midfacial morphology of Koreans with Class III malocclusions investigated with finite-element scaling analysis.J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol.2000a; 20: 10–18.
52.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Morphometry of the cranial base in subjects with Class III malocclusion.J Dent Res.1997c; 76: 694–703.
53.
SinghG.D.McNamaraJ.A.JrLozanoffS.Thin-plate spline analysis of the cranial base in subjects with Class III malocclusion.Eur J Orthod.1997d; 19: 341–353.
54.
SubtelnyJ.D.A review of cleft palate growth studies reported in the last ten years.Plast Reconstr Surg.1962; 30: 56–67.
55.
WilliamsM.D.SarverD.M.SadowskyP.L.BradleyE.Combined rapid maxillary expansion and protraction facemask in the treatment of Class III malocclusions in growing children: a prospective long-term study.Semin Orthod.1997; 3: 265–274.
56.
WoodR.J.GraysonB.H.CuttingC.B.Gingivoperiosteoplasty and midfacial growth.Cleft Palate Craniofac J.1997; 34: 17–20.
