» Articles » PMID: 37698289

Root Development Differences Between Cleft-adjacent Teeth on the Cleft Side in Comparison to Their Analogs on the Noncleft Side in Patients with Nonsyndromic Cleft Lip and Palate Who Received Secondary Alveolar Bone Grafting

Overview
Journal Angle Orthod
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2023 Sep 12
PMID 37698289
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To assess differences in root development between the cleft side (CS) and noncleft side (NCS) for permanent maxillary central incisor and canine longitudinally in patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (cUCLP) who received secondary alveolar bone grafting (SABG) and to evaluate the effects of SABG on the acceleration of root development of these teeth.

Materials And Methods: Permanent maxillary central incisors and canines of 44 subjects with nonsyndromic cUCLP who had all their cleft-related surgeries performed by the same surgeon were analyzed retrospectively from chart notes and radiographs. Panoramic and periapical radiographs at time point 1 (T1) (age, 7.55 years), at SABG (time point 2 [T2], 10.13 years), and a minimum of 2 years after SABG were studied. Root development rating scores on the NCS and CS were compared using paired t-tests and analyses of proportions.

Results: Mean root development score differences (NCS - CS) for canines and central incisors were greatest at T2 but diminished at time point 3 (T3). A larger proportion of teeth on the CS trailed the teeth on the NCS by at least 1 point at T2 than at T1 or T3, with the smallest proportion being observed at T3. The change in root development scores from T1 to T2 and from T2 to T3 showed relative CS acceleration from T2 to T3, indicating a catch-up of root development of cleft-adjacent teeth after SABG.

Conclusions: Root development of cleft-adjacent central incisors and canines is slow in comparison with their noncleft analogs. Root development of these teeth accelerates following SABG.

References
1.
Kalaaji A, Lilja J, Friede H, Elander A . Bone grafting in the mixed and permanent dentition in cleft lip and palatepatients: long-term results and the role of the surgeon's experience. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1996; 24(1):29-35. DOI: 10.1016/s1010-5182(96)80074-6. View

2.
Zhou W, Li W, Lin J, Liu D, Xie X, Zhang Z . Tooth lengths of the permanent upper incisors in patients with cleft lip and palate determined with cone beam computed tomography. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012; 50(1):88-95. DOI: 10.1597/11-182. View

3.
Waite P, WAITE D . Bone grafting for the alveolar cleft defect. Semin Orthod. 1996; 2(3):192-6. DOI: 10.1016/s1073-8746(96)80014-4. View

4.
Vandersluis Y, Fisher D, Stevens K, Tompson B, Lou W, Suri S . Comparison of dental outcomes in patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate who receive secondary alveolar bone grafting before or after emergence of the permanent maxillary canine. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020; 157(5):668-679. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.11.012. View

5.
Lai M, King N, Wong H . Dental development of Chinese children with cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008; 45(3):289-96. DOI: 10.1597/07-019. View