Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis
Objective: This study aimed to assess the lower arch length discrepancy in a group of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Materials and Method: Pretreatment dental casts and panoramic radiographs of 23 patients (aged 9–19 years) with a nonsyndromic complete UCLP, without having...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Gazi University
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | Acta Odontologica Turcica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/617189 |
| _version_ | 1797912197668536320 |
|---|---|
| author | Ayşe Gülşen Belma Işık Aslan Fatma Deniz Uzuner Gülce Tosun Neslihan Üçüncü |
| author_facet | Ayşe Gülşen Belma Işık Aslan Fatma Deniz Uzuner Gülce Tosun Neslihan Üçüncü |
| author_sort | Ayşe Gülşen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective: This study aimed to assess the lower arch length discrepancy in a group of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP).
Materials and Method: Pretreatment dental casts and panoramic radiographs of 23 patients (aged 9–19 years) with a nonsyndromic complete UCLP, without having large restorations/crowns, tooth agenesis, impacted or supernumerary teeth in the lower arch, and previous orthodontic and/or prosthetic treatment, were evaluated. All patients underwent lip and palate repair. Lower arch discrepancies were determined using the Hayes-Nance analysis. Panoramic radiographs were used to estimate the size of permanent premolars for the patients with late mixed dentition. The positive discrepancy defined diastema, whereas the negative discrepancy defined crowding in the lower arch. Descriptive statistics were presented using frequencies and percentages, and the differences were evaluated using the binomial test.
Results: One out of 23 patients had no discrepancy in the lower arch. For the remaining patients (n = 22), the prevalence of diastema was 47.8% (n = 10), with a mean value of 3.6 ± 1.9 mm, and lower arch crowding was observed in 52.2% (n = 12), with a mean value of –2.9 ± 1.4 mm. No significant difference was found between the prevalence of crowding and diastema (p = 0.832).
Conclusion: In patients with a UCLP, diastema can be encountered approximately at the same frequency as crowding in the lower arch. Crowding was at a low to mid-level. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T11:53:42Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5b3068ce1f784ab1876ee06b5dd3aa88 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2147-690X 2147-690X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T11:53:42Z |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Gazi University |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Acta Odontologica Turcica |
| spelling | doaj.art-5b3068ce1f784ab1876ee06b5dd3aa882023-02-15T16:17:01ZengGazi UniversityActa Odontologica Turcica2147-690X2147-690X2019-01-01361162010.17214/gaziaot.424633Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysisAyşe GülşenBelma Işık AslanFatma Deniz UzunerGülce TosunNeslihan ÜçüncüObjective: This study aimed to assess the lower arch length discrepancy in a group of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Materials and Method: Pretreatment dental casts and panoramic radiographs of 23 patients (aged 9–19 years) with a nonsyndromic complete UCLP, without having large restorations/crowns, tooth agenesis, impacted or supernumerary teeth in the lower arch, and previous orthodontic and/or prosthetic treatment, were evaluated. All patients underwent lip and palate repair. Lower arch discrepancies were determined using the Hayes-Nance analysis. Panoramic radiographs were used to estimate the size of permanent premolars for the patients with late mixed dentition. The positive discrepancy defined diastema, whereas the negative discrepancy defined crowding in the lower arch. Descriptive statistics were presented using frequencies and percentages, and the differences were evaluated using the binomial test. Results: One out of 23 patients had no discrepancy in the lower arch. For the remaining patients (n = 22), the prevalence of diastema was 47.8% (n = 10), with a mean value of 3.6 ± 1.9 mm, and lower arch crowding was observed in 52.2% (n = 12), with a mean value of –2.9 ± 1.4 mm. No significant difference was found between the prevalence of crowding and diastema (p = 0.832). Conclusion: In patients with a UCLP, diastema can be encountered approximately at the same frequency as crowding in the lower arch. Crowding was at a low to mid-level.http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/617189Crowdingdental archdiastema |
| spellingShingle | Ayşe Gülşen Belma Işık Aslan Fatma Deniz Uzuner Gülce Tosun Neslihan Üçüncü Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis Acta Odontologica Turcica Crowding dental arch diastema |
| title | Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis |
| title_full | Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis |
| title_fullStr | Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis |
| title_short | Discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate: orthodontic model analysis |
| title_sort | discrepancy in the lower arch perimeter in patients with a unilateral cleft lip and palate orthodontic model analysis |
| topic | Crowding dental arch diastema |
| url | http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/617189 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aysegulsen discrepancyinthelowerarchperimeterinpatientswithaunilateralcleftlipandpalateorthodonticmodelanalysis AT belmaisıkaslan discrepancyinthelowerarchperimeterinpatientswithaunilateralcleftlipandpalateorthodonticmodelanalysis AT fatmadenizuzuner discrepancyinthelowerarchperimeterinpatientswithaunilateralcleftlipandpalateorthodonticmodelanalysis AT gulcetosun discrepancyinthelowerarchperimeterinpatientswithaunilateralcleftlipandpalateorthodonticmodelanalysis AT neslihanucuncu discrepancyinthelowerarchperimeterinpatientswithaunilateralcleftlipandpalateorthodonticmodelanalysis |