The effect of lip closure on palatal growth in patients with unilateral clefts

A Narrative Review on Non-Invasive Diagnostic Tools for the Analysis of Dental Arches in Orofacial Cleft Patients

BACKGROUND

It is necessary to analyze and monitor the facial growth of orofacial cleft patients. The documentation should therefore begin before and after primary surgeries. Technological evolution has transformed plaster models into 3D images through scanners that allow rational storage, manipulation, and rotation without the possibility of breakage or damage. Based on this fact, this narrative review aims to provide a feature on the three-dimensional tools available for the assessment of dental arches in children with orofacial cleft and mixed dentition.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three databases were chosen (PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus) and keywords were used to select papers.

RESULTS

During the database screening, 292 potentially relevant papers were found. After removing duplicates, titles, and abstracts, 32 papers presented qualifications for analysis. Through evaluating each document by reading it one by one, 24 papers fulfilled the eligibility criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that digital tools-i.e., benchtop scanners which evaluate the dental arches of children with cleft lip, palate, and mixed dentition-are reproducible and reliable, without the use of ionizing radiation, allow storage, manipulation with sustainability, and help preserve the environment.

Favorable Transverse Maxillary Development after Covering the Lateral Raw Surfaces with Buccal Fat Flaps in Modified Furlow Palatoplasty: A 3D Imaging-Assisted Long-Term Comparative Outcome Study

BACKGROUND

The pedicled buccal fat flap has recently been applied to cover the lateral raw surfaces during palatoplasty as an attempt to mitigate scar-induced transverse maxillary constriction during growth, but with no formal long-term comparative analysis. This 3D imaging-assisted study assessed its impact on posterior transverse maxillary development.

METHODS

Cone beam computerized tomography scans from patients with unilateral cleft lip, alveolus and palate who received buccal fat flap (buccal fat group; n=22) or Surgicel (Surgicel group; n=32) for covering lateral raw surfaces during modified Furlow palatoplasty at 9-10 months old and had reached 9 years old were retrieved for analysis. Patients with unilateral cleft lip and alveolus (non-palatoplasty group; n=24) were also included for comparison. Using 3D maxillary image models, linear (U6T-MSP and U6J-MSP) and area measurements were calculated for cleft and non-cleft posterior maxillary sides as well as for total posterior transverse maxillary dimension.

RESULTS

The buccal fat group had significantly (all p<0.05) wider dimensions compared with the Surgicel group for all transverse maxillary measurements on both the cleft and non-cleft sides, with exception for U6J-MSP and posterior palatal area parameters on the cleft side (p>0.05). The buccal fat group had significantly (all p<0.05) wider total transverse maxillary dimensions compared with Surgicel and non-palatoplasty groups.

CONCLUSION

Covering the lateral raw surfaces with buccal fat flaps resulted in less posterior transverse maxillary constriction compared with the Surgicel-based covering procedure.

Histologic Aspect of the Curved Vomerine Mucosa in Cleft Lip and Palate

Background:

Common surgical techniques aim to turn the entire vomerine mucosa with vomer flaps either to the oral side or to the nasal side. The latter approach is widely performed due to the similarity in color to the nasal mucosa. However, we lack a histologic description of the curved vomerine mucosa in cleft lip and palate malformations.

Methods:

We histologically examined an excess of curved vomerine mucosa in 8 patients using hematoxylin–eosin, periodic acid–Schiff, Elastin van Gieson, and Alcian blue stains. Tissue samples were obtained during surgery at 8 months of age.

Results:

Our histological analysis of the mucoperiosteum overlying the curved vomer revealed characteristics consistent with those of an oral mucosa or a squamous metaplasia of the nasal mucosa, as exhibited by a stratified squamous epithelium containing numerous seromucous glands. Some areas showed a palisaded arrangement of the basal cells compatible with metaplasia of respiratory epithelium, but no goblet cells or respiratory cilia were identified. Abundant fibrosis and rich vascularity were present.

Conclusion:

The vomer mucosa showed no specific signs of nasal mucosa. These findings should be considered in presurgical cleft orthopedics and palatal surgery for further refinement. Shifting the vomer mucosa according to a fixed physiologic belief should not overrule other important aspects of cleft repair such as primary healing and establishing optimal form and function of palatal roof and nasal floor.