No abstract

Significant heterogeneity has previously been reported but with no consensus on the prevalence of dental anomalies in subjects with a cleft lip and palate (CLP), thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency of various dental anomalies in the upper dental arch in different cleft groups. Diagnostic records, i.e., panoramic, occlusal and periapical films, dental casts, and intra-oral photographs, of 122 subjects (mean age: 14 +/- 5 years; 67 males and 55 females) were grouped as either unilateral left cleft lip and palate (ULCLP), unilateral right cleft lip and palate (URCLP), bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), or cleft palate (CP). Prevalence rates of 15 different dental anomalies were calculated for each group. Wilcoxon's test was used to determine if there was a statistically significant difference in the number of missing teeth between the right and left sides, in each cleft group. Overall, 96.7 percent of patients were found to have at least one dental anomaly. The most prevalent was agenesis in the anterior region on the cleft side (70.8-97.1 percent). There was a statistically significant difference in the prevalence of agenesis by cleft and non-cleft sides but only in the ULCLP group (P< 0.001). Significantly higher rates of impaction were observed in the anterior and premolar regions in the CLP groups (2.9-29.2 percent), with the highest rates in the anterior region on the cleft sides. A very high proportion of subjects were found to have at least one dental anomaly. Thus, the management of dental anomalies should be central to the treatment planning process of individuals with a cleft.

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term satisfaction rate among skeletal class III patients following orthodontic treatment. Questionnaires were sent to 315 post-retention (between 5 to 22.5 years) patients who had received orthodontic treatment without any type of surgery for the correction of skeletal class III malocclusion. The questionnaire contained 28 questions: 10 regarding orthodontic treatment, 13 regarding satisfaction with orthodontic treatment outcomes, and five regarding psychosocial benefits of orthodontic treatment. The frequency of each variable was calculated and chi-squared test was used to determine gender correlations. The survey response rate was 15.8% (n = 40). Most patients were satisfied with their facial appearance (92.5%) and final esthetic profile (95%). Of the 5% who were dissatisfied with their final profiles, prognathic mandible was given as the reason. Most patients (90%) were satisfied with the overall treatment results. Moreover, patient perceptions of psychosocial benefits of treatment were mainly positive, with the majority (72.5%) stating their social communication had improved following orthodontic treatment. Chi-squared test indicated almost no variations in response by gender. In conclusion, the majority of skeletal class III patients in the long-term post-retention period who had received orthodontic treatment were satisfied with the overall treatment outcome.

This case report presents the results of functional and myofunctional treatment of a 9-year, 5-month-old male patient with laterognathy, facial asymmetry and dentofacial deformity. The patient had a history of herpes encephalitis at age 8.5 months and palsy on the left side in early childhood, and his left side remained paralyzed as a sequela. The patient had dentoalveolar asymmetry with a Class I right and Class III left canine relation, a 1.5 mm midline deviation, anterior cross-bite, an overjet of -3 mm and an overbite of 3 mm. The dentoalveolar and facial asymmetries were corrected using a modified removable appliance, with an acrylic vestibular shield inserted on the right side to guide the mandible in the upper arch and an acrylic plate with artificial teeth in the lower arch. The patient was instructed to practice myofunctional exercises regularly. In total, treatment, including observation, was completed in a period of 2 years and 10 months, at which time, a marked correction in facial asymmetry and profile and improvement in smile esthetics could be observed. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:341-347)