Maxillary Development in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Compared with Individuals Having Skeletal Class I and Class III Malocclusion.

AIM: To compare maxillary development of individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate (CLP) to individuals with skeletal Class I and Class III malocclusions.

STUDY

DESIGN

Cephalometric X-ray films from 90 patients (mean age: 13 ± 2.3 years) were used. The number of samples was determined by Power analysis and three groups consisting of 30 patients (Group 1: Skeletal Class I, Group 2: Skeletal Class III, Group 3: CLP) were formed. A total of 13 cephalometric measurements were performed using Dolphin imaging software 11.7. The Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA tests were used to calculate the differences. The Dunn test and Bonferroni correction were used in paired group comparisons.

RESULTS

SNA, Co-A, A-PTV Horizontal, Na-APog, A-Na-Pog, FH-NA, Sn'-Mx1, MxOP-TVL (p<0.001***), U6-PTV Vertical (p<0.01**), and NaBa PTV-Gn (p<0.05*) values were significantly different between the three groups. There was no significant difference in Na-ANS, FH-NPog, or Mx1 labial-ULA. SNA, Co-A, A-PTV Horizontal, Na-APog, and A-Na-Pog values between the 1st and 2nd groups and between the 1st and 3rd groups (p<0.001***) were significantly different. FH-Na-A, Sn'-Mx1, MxOP-TVL (p<0.001***), and U6-PTV vertical were different between groups 1 and 3 (p<0.01**), while FH-Na-A (p<0.001***), Sn'-Mx1, MxOP-TVL (p<0.01**), A-PTV Horizontal, and A-Na-Pog (p<0.05*) were significantly different between groups 2 and 3.

CONCLUSION

Maxillary development in CLP differs from skeletal Class I but is similar to skeletal Class III. Considering the delay in maxillary development in the CLP patient, maxillary protraction and maxillary expansion are important treatment protocols in the early period.