Association between tooth size and interarch relationships in children with operated complete unilateral cleft lip and palate

Abstract

BackgroundTo evaluate mesiodistal tooth width of patients with UCLP comparing tooth size in different Goslon Yardstick scores and between cleft and noncleft sides.MethodsThe Department of Orthodontics at Bauru Dental School and Hospital of Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies – University of Sao Paulo. Hundred forty-four pairs of dental casts of patients with UCLP. These dental casts were divided into 3 groups: group I (patients with Goslon rating of 1 and 2), group II (Goslon rating of 3) and group III (Goslon rating of 4 and 5). The control group consisted of 40 pairs of dental casts of noncleft Class I patients at the same age range. Mesiodistal width of maxillary permanent central incisors, lateral incisors and first molars were measured using a digital caliper. Intergroup comparisons were performed using ANOVA followed by Tukey tests. T tests were used to compare tooth size between cleft and noncleft sides (p <0.05).ResultsDifferences for tooth size were observed between individuals with different Goslon Yardstik scores. Mesiodistal widths of maxillary central incisors in subjects of Group III were significantly smaller compared to Group I and to the control group. The lateral incisors at the cleft side were smaller than the antimere.ConclusionsMesiodistal tooth size was smaller in poor Goslon yardstick scores. Cleft and noncleft sides demonstrated similar maxillary tooth size except for the lateral incisor.

Closure of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis space in unilateral cleft lip and palate: a digital model assessment

“…A previous study demonstrated that narrow canines were preferred in the position of lateral incisors. 33 No mesiodistal tooth size asymmetries were found for the maxillary central incisors in this study, corroborating the study by Santos et al 34 However, other previous studies have reported smaller anterior tooth size on the cleft side in UCLP, compared to noncleft side. [35][36][37] Tooth size and shape differences of the cleft side central incisors may be associated with the dental anomalies pattern.…”

Cleft sidedness and congenitally missing teeth in patients with cleft lip and palate patients

“…The prevalence of congenitally missing teeth in the general population has been reported within a range of 0.027 to 10.1 %, which varies greatly according to geographic location and race [5–7]. Clefts of all types are often associated with congenitally missing teeth,[8] and when compared with the general population, subjects with CLP have always been found to have a higher prevalence of dental anomalies, such as variations in tooth number and position, and reduced tooth dimensions, most of which are localized in the area of the cleft defect [9–11]. Rullo et al examined the prevalence of different types of dental anomalies in children with cleft and found that congenital absence of the cleft-side lateral incisor was observed in 40 % of the samples and a total of 30 % patients showed supernumerary teeth at the incisors region [12].…”

Comparison of Missing Permanent Tooth in Bangladeshi Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate to those without Cleft Lip and Palate

“…The prevalence of congenitally missing teeth in the general population has been reported within a range of 0.027 to 10.1%, which varies greatly according to geographic location and race 8 . When compared with the general population, subjects with CLP have always been found to have a higher prevalence of dental anomalies, such as variations in tooth number and position, and reduced tooth dimensions, most of which are localized in the area of the cleft defect 9 . The frequency of patients with congenitally missing teeth is 1.6 to 9.6%, as reported by Graber 10 .…”