Search

Objective: The aim was to evaluate dental arch relation and craniofacial growth for individuals born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), who had two-stage palatal surgery, with hard palate closure (HPC) at the ages of 3 or 8 years. Design: Longitudinal cohort study. Setting: Ceft lip and palate team in Gothenburg, Sweden. Patients: The inclusion criteria were nonsyndromic individuals born with complete UCLP who were consecutively operated according to two different surgical protocols; soft palate closure at 6 months followed by hard palate closure at the age of 3 years (HPC3) or at the age of 8 years (HPC8). In this evaluation, 28 individuals had HPC3 and 59 individuals had HPC8. Internventions: The main outcome, longitudinal series of dental casts and lateral radiographs from the ages of 5, 10, 16, and 19 years, were evaluated using GOSLON Yardstick and cephalometric analysis. Results: At the age of 10 years, 78% of the individuals with HPC3 demonstrated GOSLON scores of 1 and 2 and 86% in HPC8. At the age of 19 years, 54% of the individuals exhibited GOSLON scores of 1or 2 when compared with 74% in HPC8. A statistical significant difference for SNA was observed at the age of 5 years (P =.004), with a lower SNA in HPC3, but not at the ages of 10, 16 and 19 years. At the final age, SNA was 75.2° for HPC3 and 76.8° for HPC8. Conclusions: The decrease in age for HPC did not have an adverse effect on long-term dental arch relationship or craniofacial growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim was to evaluate dental arch relation and craniofacial growth for individuals born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), who had two-stage palatal surgery, with hard palate closure (HPC) at the ages of 3 or 8 years., Design: Longitudinal cohort study., Setting: Ceft lip and palate team in Gothenburg, Sweden., Patients: The inclusion criteria were nonsyndromic individuals born with complete UCLP who were consecutively operated according to two different surgical protocols; soft palate closure at 6 months followed by hard palate closure at the age of 3 years (HPC3) or at the age of 8 years (HPC8). In this evaluation, 28 individuals had HPC3 and 59 individuals had HPC8., Internventions: The main outcome, longitudinal series of dental casts and lateral radiographs from the ages of 5, 10, 16, and 19 years, were evaluated using GOSLON Yardstick and cephalometric analysis., Results: At the age of 10 years, 78% of the individuals with HPC3 demonstrated GOSLON scores of 1 and 2 and 86% in HPC8. At the age of 19 years, 54% of the individuals exhibited GOSLON scores of 1or 2 when compared with 74% in HPC8. A statistical significant difference for SNA was observed at the age of 5 years ( P    =   .004), with a lower SNA in HPC3, but not at the ages of 10, 16 and 19 years. At the final age, SNA was 75.2° for HPC3 and 76.8° for HPC8., Conclusions: The decrease in age for HPC did not have an adverse effect on long-term dental arch relationship or craniofacial growth.

Background and Trial Design: The Scandcleft intercentre study evaluates the outcomes of four surgical protocols for treatment of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Originally 10 cleft centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and the UK participated in a set of three randomized trials of primary surgery. Three groups of centres (Trials 1, 2, and 3) tested their traditional local surgical protocols (Arms B, C, and D) against a common protocol (Arm A)., Objectives: To evaluate dental arch relationships at age 8 years after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP. These results are secondary outcomes of the overall trial., Methods: Study models of 411 children (270 boys, 141 girls) with non-syndromic UCLP at a mean age of 8.1 (range 7.0-10.0) years were available. Dental arch relationships were analysed using the GOSLON Yardstick by a blinded panel of 11 orthodontists. To assess reliability, Kappa statistics were calculated. The trials were tested statistically with t-tests., Results: Comparisons within each trial showed no statistically significant differences in the mean 8-year index scores or their distributions between the common protocol and the local team protocol. The mean index scores were Trial 1: Arm A 3.03, Arm B 2.82, Trial 2: Arm A 2.78, Arm C 2.64, and Trial 3: Arm A 3.06, Arm D 3.08. Comparisons between the trials detected a significantly (P < 0.005) better mean index score Trial 2 Arm C than in Trial 3 Arm D. The intra- and inter-rater reliabilities were acceptable., Conclusion: The results of these three trials do not provide evidence that one surgical protocol is better than the others., Trial Registration: ISRCTN29932826., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aim: Good dentofacial growth is a major goal in the treatment of unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). The aim was to evaluate dental arch relationships at age 5 years after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP., Design: Three parallel randomised clinical trials were undertaken as an international multi-centre study by 10 cleft teams in five countries: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and the UK., Methods: Three different surgical procedures for primary palatal repair (Arms B, C, D) were tested against a common procedure (Arm A) in the total cohort of 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP. Study models of 418 patients (273 boys) at the mean age of 5.1 years (range = 4.8-7.0) were available. Dental arch relationships were assessed using the 5-year index by a blinded panel of 16 orthodontists. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess reliability. The trials were tested statistically with t- and Chi-square tests., Results: Good-to-very good levels of intra- and interrater reliability were obtained (0.71-0.94 and 0.70-0.87). Comparisons within each trial showed no statistically significant differences in the mean 5-year index scores or their distributions between the common method and the local team protocol. The mean index scores varied from 2.52 (Trial 2, Arm C) to 2.94 (Trial 3, Arm D)., Conclusion: The results of the three trials do not provide statistical evidence that one technique is better than the others. Further analysis of the possible influence of individual surgical skill and learning curve are being pursued in this dataset., Trial Registration: ISRCTN29932826.

Background and Aims: Longstanding uncertainty surrounds the selection of surgical protocols for the closure of unilateral cleft lip and palate, and randomised trials have only rarely been performed. This paper is an introduction to three randomised trials of primary surgery for children born with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). It presents the protocol developed for the trials in CONSORT format, and describes the management structure that was developed to achieve the long-term engagement and commitment required to complete the project., Method: Ten established national or regional cleft centres participated. Lip and soft palate closure at 3-4 months, and hard palate closure at 12 months served as a common method in each trial. Trial 1 compared this with hard palate closure at 36 months. Trial 2 compared it with lip closure at 3-4 months and hard and soft palate closure at 12 months. Trial 3 compared it with lip and hard palate closure at 3-4 months and soft palate closure at 12 months. The primary outcomes were speech and dentofacial development, with a series of perioperative and longer-term secondary outcomes., Results: Recruitment of 448 infants took place over a 9-year period, with 99.8% subsequent retention at 5 years., Conclusion: The series of reports that follow this introductory paper include comparisons at age 5 of surgical outcomes, speech outcomes, measures of dentofacial development and appearance, and parental satisfaction. The outcomes recorded and the numbers analysed for each outcome and time point are described in the series., Trial Registration: ISRCTN29932826.