The Slavcleft: A Three-Center Study of the Outcome of Treatment of Cleft Lip and Palate Considering Palatal Shape.

The degree of deviation of palatal shape from the norm may reflect facial growth disturbance in cleft lip and palate (CLP). The objective of this study was to compare the palatal morphology in children treated with different surgical protocols. Palatal shape was assessed with geometric morphometrics (GM) including Procrustes superimposition, principal component analysis (PCA), and permutation tests with 10,000 permutations, in 24 children treated with two-stage repair with a late palatoplasty (Prague group; mean age at assessment 8.9 years), 16 children after two-stage repair with early palatoplasty (Bratislava group; mean age 8.2 years), and 53 children treated with a one-stage repair (Warsaw group, mean age 10.3 years). The non-cleft control group comprised 60 children at 8.6 years. The first five principal components (PCs) accounted for a minimum of 5% of the total shape variability (65.9% in total). The Procrustes distance was largest for the Prague vs. Control pair and smallest for the Prague vs. Bratislava pair. Nonetheless, all intergroup differences were statistically significant (p < 0.01). One can conclude that variations in palatal shape roughly correspond to cephalometric and dental arch relationship findings from prior research. Among the children who underwent a one-stage repair of the complete cleft, their palatal morphology most closely resembled that of the non-cleft controls. Conversely, children who received late palatoplasty exhibited the greatest degree of deviation.

The Slavcleft: a three-center study of the outcome of treatment of cleft lip and palate. Nasolabial appearance.

BACKGROUND: There is a multitude of protocols of treatment of cleft lip and palate (CLP) worldwide differing in number of operations, surgical techniques, and timings of surgeries. Despite, facial appearance in subjects with CLP is rarely ideal and residual stigmata are easy to notice in many patients irrespective of the protocol. The prospective controlled investigations are optimal for comparing effectiveness of treatment protocols. Because prospective studies are very challenging to perform in CLP field, it is reasonable to retrospectively assess different surgical protocols to identify the promising ones and then to test them in a prospective way. METHODS: Our objective was to assess the nasolabial appearance in a preadolescent Slavic population with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) by using the 0-200 numeric scale with reference photographs. Patients treated in Warsaw, Poland (n = 32), Prague, Czech Republic (n = 26) and Bratislava, Slovakia (n = 17) were included in this retrospective study. Each cleft center used a unique surgical protocol. Two panels of professional raters (n = 7) and laypeople (n = 10) scored blindly the nasolabial esthetics on cropped frontal and profile images with cropped reference photograph present on the same slide. Intra- and inter-rater agreement was assessed with Cronbach's alpha, intraclass correlation coefficients, t-tests, and Bland-Altman plots. Inter-group differences were evaluated with one-way ANOVA and regression analysis. RESULTS: The agreement within and between raters was acceptable. We found that patients treated in Warsaw, Prague, and Bratislava showed comparable nasolabial appearance on frontal and profile photographs when judged by both professional raters (p > 0.05) and laypeople (p > 0.05). Regression analysis did not identify influence of gender, group (i.e., Warsaw, Prague, and Bratislava), age at lip repair, surgeon, and age at photographic assessment on esthetic outcome (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study showed that none of the surgical protocols showed superiority to produce good nasolabial appearance.

The Slavcleft: A three-center study of the outcome of treatment of cleft lip and palate. Part 2: Dental arch relationships.

PURPOSE: Our aim was to evaluate the dental arch relationship in a preadolescent Slavic population with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) by using the Goslon Yardstick. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated in Warsaw, Poland (n = 32), Prague, Czech Republic (n = 33) and Bratislava, Slovakia (n = 30) were included in this retrospective study. Each cleft center used a unique surgical protocol. Three raters scored blindly the dental arch relationship on plaster models. Intra- and inter-rater agreement were assessed with kappa statistics, and differences between the groups were evaluated with one-way analysis of variance. Intra-rater agreement was very good (k > 0.825), while inter-rater agreement was either good or very good (kappa >0.703). RESULTS: We found that patients treated in Warsaw showed a more favorable dental arch relationship (Goslon score = 2.58, SD = 0.77) than patients treated in Prague (Goslon score = 3.21, SD = 1.04). Patients treated in Bratislava showed an intermediate Goslon score (3.07; SD = 0.99). CONCLUSION: This study showed that the dental arch relationships in patients treated in Warsaw with a one-stage repair were more favorable than in patients treated in Prague and Bratislava with a two-stage protocol and comparable to the best results obtained in the Eurocleft and Americleft studies.

Dentoalveolar Arch Dimensions in UCLP Boys After Neonatal Cheiloplasty or After Lip Surgery at the Age of 3 or 6 Months.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the influence of 3 different time protocols of cleft lip and palate operations on the growth of the dentoalveolar arch in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 64 plaster casts of 8-year-old boys with UCLP operated on according to 3 different time protocols: lip repair at the age of 6 months and palate repair at 4 years, lip repair at 3 months and palate repair at 9 months, and neonatal lip repair and palate repair at 9 months. The control group contained 13 plaster casts of 8-year-old boys. The dentoalveolar arch width was measured between deciduous canines and between the second deciduous molars; the length was measured between incisive papilla and the line connecting both tuber maxillae. RESULTS: All measured distances were statistically significantly smaller in boys with UCLP than in the control group. Intercanine width was not statistically significantly different between the patients operated on according to the different time protocols. In comparison to the lip repair at 6 months and palate repair at 4 years, the intermolar width was statistically significantly smaller in the group with neonatal lip repair; the alveolar arch length was statistically significantly shorter in both groups with lip repair performed neonatally or at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: The length of the dentoalveolar arch is shorter after surgical repair of cleft lip neonatally or at the age of 3 months. Cleft palate repair at 9 months can contribute to a reduction in the width of the dentoalveolar arch.

Using dental implants in the prosthetic rehabilitation of patients with cleft defect type II.

A dental implant may be used in prosthetic tooth reconstruction in cleft patients. There are three main indications for this approach: substitution of a missing single tooth, an abutment for the framework, and an abutment for a fixed dental prosthesis (we designate these as defect types I, II, and III). A clinical report about prosthetic rehabilitation using dental implants instead of a fixed or removable partial prosthesis is presented. A patient with a unilateral cleft defect was treated at the University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic. Together with a missing lateral incisor, the defect was associated with agenesis of the two upper canines and three second premolars. The treatment was completed by prosthetic dental reconstruction using the framework with a dental implant as an abutment. This approach allowed minimizing the preparation of adjacent teeth to a single tooth functioning as the second abutment. If classical fixed prosthodontics had been performed, the preparation would have involved a larger group of intact teeth with the risk of their viability loss. The procedure had no complications. The outcome was of high quality and brought satisfaction to the patient.

Bone reconstruction of the maxillary alveolus for subsequent insertion of a dental implant in patients with cleft lip and palate.

Bone grafting of maxillary alveolus cleft defect followed by insertion of dental implant may be a good alternative to conventional prosthetic treatment. The principle is the formation of stable alveolar crest with a sufficient three-dimensional volume. The problems are lack and quality of mucoperiosteum for the reconstruction of shell and bone gap characteristics for bone graft intake. The procedure was carried out by a single surgeon (MD) in 45 patients between 29 August 2001 and 30 June 2006, with an 86.7% success rate. The success was defined as completed process with dental implant insertion and its loading by a prosthetic suprastructure without a failure for at least 15 months from that last step. The success rate mainly depends on 1) good alveolar arch flow of maxilla segments in both horizontal and vertical planes; 2) the height of osseous poles of at least 12 mm and onlay augmentation of built-up section does not work; 3) adequate volume of cancellous bone graft, 3.7 cm on average. On the basis of histologic verification and clinical findings, the bone graft is matured enough to ensure a primary stability of a fixture in 12.5 weeks after reconstruction. Early load may prevent bone resorption. Prediction of complications are as follows: 1) graft resorption increases according to gap size and low possibility of revascularization; 2) a higher number of complications are linked to presence of oronasal fistula and to scarring of soft tissues; 3) because of more gracile skeleton and female metabolism, the risk is higher in women.