The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2005
Attitude of the canine in secondary bone-grafted and nongrafted patients with cleft lip and palate.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gereltzul Enkhtuvshin, Baba Yoshiyuki, Ohyama Kimie
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the eruption pattern of the cleft-side canine regarding its pre-eruption position relative to the cleft in bone-grafted (BG) and nongrafted (NonBG) patients with cleft lip and palate.
METHODS: Fifty-three patients with cleft lip and palate (21 BG, 32 NonBG) were examined by panoramic radiography and posteroanterior cephalography taken before and after canine eruption. Subjects were categorized into BG, NonBG, and control groups. Canines at the pre-eruption stage were categorized as close to (group 1) or distant from (group 2) the cleft area. The canine angle and its change between the two stages were evaluated.
RESULTS: No significant differences were noted between the initial canine angle of the BG and NonBG groups. Although canines in the BG group erupted without a significant change in angle, the canine angle increased significantly (p < .0001) in the NonBG and control groups. In group 1, a greater change in canine angle was noted in the NonBG (p < .05) and control (p < .01) groups than in the BG group. In group 2, no significant difference was noted among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In BG patients, a canine located near the cleft appears to erupt at the same angle as it had before grafting. However, in NonBG patients, it erupts more vertically, guided by cortical bone. For canines distant from the cleft area, there is no significant difference in the change in angulation between NonBG and BG patients.
METHODS: Fifty-three patients with cleft lip and palate (21 BG, 32 NonBG) were examined by panoramic radiography and posteroanterior cephalography taken before and after canine eruption. Subjects were categorized into BG, NonBG, and control groups. Canines at the pre-eruption stage were categorized as close to (group 1) or distant from (group 2) the cleft area. The canine angle and its change between the two stages were evaluated.
RESULTS: No significant differences were noted between the initial canine angle of the BG and NonBG groups. Although canines in the BG group erupted without a significant change in angle, the canine angle increased significantly (p < .0001) in the NonBG and control groups. In group 1, a greater change in canine angle was noted in the NonBG (p < .05) and control (p < .01) groups than in the BG group. In group 2, no significant difference was noted among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In BG patients, a canine located near the cleft appears to erupt at the same angle as it had before grafting. However, in NonBG patients, it erupts more vertically, guided by cortical bone. For canines distant from the cleft area, there is no significant difference in the change in angulation between NonBG and BG patients.