Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2014
Short mandible - a possible risk factor for cleft palate with/without a cleft lip.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hermann N V, Darvann T A, Ersbøll B K, Kreiborg S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the influence of a short mandible on the risk of developing a cleft palate with/without a cleft lip (CP).
SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: The retrospective sample consisted of 115 2-month-old Danish infants with CP, and 70 control infants with unilateral incomplete cleft lip (UICL).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cephalometric X-rays were obtained. Mandibular length (Lm ) was measured and corrected for body length (Lb ) to remove influence of varying body length in the sample. Logistic regression was applied to the corrected mandibular length (Lmc ) to calculate the risk of having a cleft palate.
RESULTS: The mean mandibular length in the group with CP was about 4 mm shorter than in the control group. Odds ratio (OR) was calculated to be 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.48-0.68), implying that an individual's risk of cleft palate with/without a cleft lip increases about 50% per mm decrease in mandibular length.
CONCLUSIONS: A special facial type including a short mandible is a possible risk factor for cleft palate, and it was found that the risk of cleft palate increases 58% per mm decreases in mandibular length.
SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: The retrospective sample consisted of 115 2-month-old Danish infants with CP, and 70 control infants with unilateral incomplete cleft lip (UICL).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cephalometric X-rays were obtained. Mandibular length (Lm ) was measured and corrected for body length (Lb ) to remove influence of varying body length in the sample. Logistic regression was applied to the corrected mandibular length (Lmc ) to calculate the risk of having a cleft palate.
RESULTS: The mean mandibular length in the group with CP was about 4 mm shorter than in the control group. Odds ratio (OR) was calculated to be 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.48-0.68), implying that an individual's risk of cleft palate with/without a cleft lip increases about 50% per mm decrease in mandibular length.
CONCLUSIONS: A special facial type including a short mandible is a possible risk factor for cleft palate, and it was found that the risk of cleft palate increases 58% per mm decreases in mandibular length.