2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.08.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of primary palatoplasty on the maxillomandibular sagittal relationship in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
0
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
12
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The sagittal cephalometric measurement adopted here has also been used in maxillary growth studies. 14 , 15 However, as sagittal facial skeleton growth of cleft patients has been evaluated at longer follow-up periods (eg, 3, 5, 10, and more years of follow-up), 14 , 15 further investigation is needed to determine the potential effects of the rhBMP-2 on midface growth of cleft patients after maxillary cleft repair. In fact, we performed all cephalometric measurements at 1 year after the secondary alveolar cleft repair to allow either bone induction or bone integration to its cleft bed and because this time interval (1 year) seems to be an ideal period to assess the anterior maxilla changes by avoiding the insertion of facial growth variable into analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sagittal cephalometric measurement adopted here has also been used in maxillary growth studies. 14 , 15 However, as sagittal facial skeleton growth of cleft patients has been evaluated at longer follow-up periods (eg, 3, 5, 10, and more years of follow-up), 14 , 15 further investigation is needed to determine the potential effects of the rhBMP-2 on midface growth of cleft patients after maxillary cleft repair. In fact, we performed all cephalometric measurements at 1 year after the secondary alveolar cleft repair to allow either bone induction or bone integration to its cleft bed and because this time interval (1 year) seems to be an ideal period to assess the anterior maxilla changes by avoiding the insertion of facial growth variable into analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conducted when I was a resident at the Hospital de Reabilitação de Anomalias Craniofaciais / Universidade de São Paulo (HRAC-USP), this study 2 found evidence that the main effect of changes in the face of individuals with unilateral cleft lip and palate were a result of the lip, and not of the palate, surgery, as was believed before. And, lo and behold, despite this conclusion, ratified by a systematic review and meta-analysis, 3 the lip surgery has kept, until today, practically the same surgical protocol in terms of intervention time. Einstein believed that, “It is easier to smash an atom than a prejudice”.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Os comprimentos sagitais (I-CC' e I-MM'), na maxila, demonstraram-se estatisticamente menores (P<0,001) no grupo FLPU, evidenciando a atrofia sagital maxilar já caracterizada por estudos como os de Bishara et al, (2015) e Shi e Losee, (2015). Como possíveis razões disso, Maluf Jr., (2014)…”
Section: Dimensões Anteroposteriores Ou Sagitaisunclassified