Long Term Effects of the Latham Presurgical Maxillary Orthopedic Appliance, Including Effects on Tooth Growth

2000 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel C Samson ◽  
Donald H Lalonde ◽  
Donald Fitzpatrick ◽  
Gerald L Sparkes
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Consistent Difference ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Beneficial Effects ◽  
Alar Base ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Base Elevation

Reported beneficial effects of presurgical maxillary orthopedics in cleft lip include reduction of the cleft width, alignment of the maxillary segments, elevation of the alar base on the cleft side, diminished need for alveolar bone grafting and lip closure without tension. Possible adverse effects of presurgical maxillary orthopedics include tooth root damage and inability of periosteoplasty to make bone over the cleft. A series of wide cleft lip patients (n=15) treated with the Latham appliance at the time of lip closure were retrospectively compared with a similar group treated without the Latham appliance. The Latham appliance group (seven unilateral clefts, eight bilateral clefts; mean follow-up 9.5 years; range four to 18 years) was treated between the years 1980 and 1994. None of the 15 patients treated with the appliance had any tooth loss or damage attributable to the pins, and bone formation in the alveolar cleft was observed radiographically in all 13 of the patients who had a periosteoplasty at the time of lip repair, possibly obviating the need for secondary bone grafting. Five of these Latham group patients demonstrated clinical and radiographic evidence of tooth eruption into the periosteoplasty-formed bone. There was no consistent difference in the level of nasal alar base elevation in the two groups.

Comparison of Facial Form in Primary Alveolar Bone-Grafted and Nongrafted Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients: Intercenter Retrospective Study

1996 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carroll-Ann Trotman ◽  
Ross E. Long ◽  
Sheldon W. Rosenstein ◽  
Carole Murphy ◽  
Lysle E. Johnston
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Craniofacial Morphology ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Treatment Protocols ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Matching Criteria

The purpose of this study was to describe and compare posttreatment craniofacial morphology in samples of complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) patients treated at two leading clinics: The Children's Memorial Hospital Cleft Palate Clinic, Chicago, Illinois, and the Lancaster Cleft Palate Clinic, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. These centers have well-defined treatment protocols that allow the long-term effects on craniofacial form of the following treatment regimes to be contrasted: (1) Chicago—primary alveolar bone grafting, with definitive lip repair at age 4 to 6 months and hard and soft palate repair at 6 to 12 months; and (2) Lancaster—definitive triangular-flap lip repair at 3 months of age, followed by staged surgeries of the hard and soft palates, both completed by 18 months of age, but without primary alveolar bone grafting. Although the Lancaster center now performs secondary alveolar bone grafting, the majority of the patients studied here were treated before this procedure became part of their protocol. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had no other congenital anomalies and no previous orthodontic treatment. A sample of 43 (24 male, 19 female) CUCLP patients was obtained from the Chicago Center, each of which was then matched to a non-grafted Lancaster CUCLP patient. The matching criteria were age, sex, and sella-nasion distance (to control, at least in part, for size differences). Lateral cephalometric radiographs of these 86 CUCLP patients were traced, digitized, and analyzed. Additionally, all linear data were adjusted to a standard magnification of 8% because the cephalograms from each center featured different enlargements. The Chicago and Lancaster samples had mean posttreatment ages of 10.32 years (SD = 1.96) and 10.40 years (SD = 2.18), respectively. The grafted Chicago group had faces that were on average less maxillary protrusive compared with the nongrafted Lancaster sample; it appeared, however, that the mandible compensated for the maxillary position by downward and backward rotation. As a result, a similar maxillomandibular relationship was noted in both groups, although, in the Chicago group, the lower anterior facial height increased.

scholarly journals Alveolar bone grafting

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (S 01) ◽  
pp. S110-S115
Author(s):  
Jan Lilja
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Mixed Dentition ◽  
Lateral Incisor ◽  
Canine Tooth ◽  
Alar Base ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Palate Bone

ABSTRACTIn patients with cleft lip and palate, bone grafting in the mixed dentition in the residual alveolar cleft has become a well-established procedure. The main advantages can be summarised as follows: stabilisation of the maxillary arch; facilitation of eruption of the canine and sometimes facilitation of the lateral incisor eruption; providing bony support to the teeth adjacent to the cleft; raising the alar base of the nose; facilitation of closure of an oro-nasal fistula; making it possible to insert a titanium fixture in the grafted site and to obtain favourable periodontal conditions of the teeth within and adjacent to the cleft. The timing of the ABG surgery take into consideration not only eruption of the canine but also that of the lateral incisor, if present. The best time for bone grafting surgery is when a thin shell of bone still covers the soon erupting lateral incisor or canine tooth close to the cleft.

Optimization of Dental Status Improves Long-Term Outcome after Alveolar Bone Grafting in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate

2015 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatima Jabbari ◽  
Valdemar Skoog ◽  
Eicka Reiser ◽  
Malin Hakelius ◽  
Daniel Nowinski
Keyword(s):  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Dental Status ◽  
Term Outcome ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Surgical Orthodontic Procedure with Bone Grafts for Patients with Cleft Palate during Adolescence

2021 ◽  
pp. 750-755
Author(s):  
Ravindra Manerikar ◽  
Shilpa Pharande ◽  
N. G Toshniwal ◽  
Kishor Chougule ◽  
Abhijit Misal
Keyword(s):  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Multidisciplinary Approach ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Alar Base ◽  
Grafting Technique ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting

Background: Cleft lip and palate is a congenital anomaly, presenting in a wide variety of forms and combinations. Successful cleft lip and cleft palate rehabilitation requires a multidisciplinary approach employing the skills of different specialists. Aims & Objectives: The aim of this paper was to present orthodontic preparation of patients prior to alveolar bone grafting & to review our findings in a group of patients treated by secondary and delayed bone-grafting procedures at our institution. Methodology: Thirty eight patients were examined for the type of cleft and the age at the time of examination. 10 patients were treated in our institution with presurgical orthodontics & operated by a delayed bone-grafting technique.  Duration and type of expansion was noted at pre-operative, 2 months and 6 months. Crestal bone heights and the quality of the bone in the grafted areas was examined radiographically, along with presence of any fistulas. Results: All the patients demonstrated improved alar base and upper lip support, also better dental stability was seen in the region of cleft. Conclusion: All the patients included in this study appeared to benefit from the procedure with improved facial balance. In all ten patients the oronasal fistulas remained closed, hence was reported to be a success.

Mind the Gap: Alveolar Bone Graft Revision in the Era of Computed Tomography

2021 ◽  
pp. 105566562110026
Author(s):  
Ema Zubovic ◽  
Gary B. Skolnick ◽  
Abdullah M. Said ◽  
Richard J. Nissen ◽  
Alison K. Snyder-Warwick ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Bone Grafting ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Cleft Lip And Palate ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Radiographic Examination ◽  
Graft Take ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Ct Evaluation

Objective: To determine the rate of revision alveolar bone grafting (ABG) in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) before and after the introduction of postoperative computed tomography (CT). Design: Retrospective case–control study analyzing the incidence of revision ABG in patients with and without postoperative CT scans for graft success evaluation. Setting: Academic tertiary care pediatric hospital. Patients: Eighty-seven patients with CLP or cleft lip and alveolus treated with autologous iliac crest bone grafting for alveolar clefts over a 10-year period (January 2009 to March 2019) with minimum 6-month follow-up. Fifty patients had postoperative CT evaluation; 37 did not. Interventions: Postoperative CT to determine ABG success, versus standard clinical examination and 2-dimensional radiographs. Main Outcome Measures: Requirement for revision ABG, defined as failure of the original graft by clinical or radiographic examination. Results: Fifty-eight percent of patients underwent a postoperative CT scan at median interval of 10 months after surgery. Patients with postoperative CT evaluation had a 44% rate of revision ABG (22/50) for inadequate graft take, compared to 5% (2/37) in patients without postoperative CT ( P < .001; 95% CT, 31%-58% in the CT group, 1%-16% in the non-CT group). Conclusions: Computed tomography evaluation after ABG is associated with a significantly increased revision rate for inadequate graft take. The presence of a secondary palatal fistula at the time of original ABG is not associated with revision requirement. Lack of standardized dental and orthodontic records complicates the study of ABG outcomes and presents an area for systems-based improvement.

The Effects of Secondary Cleft Procedures on Alar Base Position and Nostril Morphology in Patients with Unilateral Clefts

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie M. Power ◽  
Damir B. Matic
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Cleft Lip ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Nonparametric Tests ◽  
Single Stage ◽  
Base Position ◽  
Alar Base ◽  
Alveolar Bone Grafting ◽  
Tertiary Center ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Objective To compare effects of secondary cleft procedures on alar base position and nostril morphology. Design Retrospective review. Setting Multidisciplinary cleft clinic at tertiary center. Patients, Participants Seventy consecutive patients with unilateral clefts were grouped according to secondary procedure. Interventions Alveolar bone graft versus total lip takedown with anatomic muscle repair versus single-stage total lip with cleft septorhinoplasty (nose-lip) versus rhinoplasty alone. Main Outcome Measures Anthropometric measurements were recorded from pre- and postoperative photographs. Ratios of cleft to noncleft side were compared within and across groups pre- and postoperatively using parametric and nonparametric tests. Results Within the bone graft group, no differences were seen postoperatively in alar base position in long-term follow-up. The total lip group demonstrated greater symmetry at the alar base ( P < .001), increased vertical lip dimension ( P < .001), and decreased nostril height ( P = .004) postoperatively. Within the nose-lip group, increased vertical dimension and alar base support ( P < .001) were also seen postoperatively. Across groups, the single-stage nose-lip group demonstrated greatest alar base symmetry on worm's-eye view ( P < .04). Conclusions Alar base asymmetry in patients with unilateral clefts may be related to soft tissue deficiency and was not affected by alveolar bone grafting. Total lip takedown with anatomic muscle reapproximation was associated with increased alar base symmetry and vertical lip dimension on cleft to noncleft side. Greatest symmetry at the alar base was seen following single-stage nose-lip reconstruction, which may be an effective technique for correcting the secondary cleft lip nasal deformity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document