Is missing maxillary lateral incisor in complete cleft lip and palate a product of genetics or local environment?

Dentino, Kelley M.; Peck, Sheldon; Garib, Daniela Gamba

doi:10.2319/012012-49.1

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results confirm findings of previous research investigations, which suggest that tooth agenesis encompassing multiple missing teeth has been clearly identified under genetic control of multifactorial inheritance [28–30]. Several of these critical genetic controls assume a mutual part in the development of orofacial clefts [31].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence of tooth agenesis and structural dental anomalies in association with cleft type in non-syndromic oral cleft patients

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of tooth agenesis, microdontia, and tooth malformation among non-syndromic oral cleft patients and their potential association with cleft type and gender.MethodsIntraoral records and radiographs of 154 patients (97 males and 57 females) were examined. The variables assessed were tooth agenesis, microdontia, dental malformations, and cleft types. The statistics included chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests as well as logistic regression to assess any mutual effects of gender and cleft type on the dental variables.ResultsTooth agenesis occurred in 50% of the sample and microdontia in 18%. Non-statistically significant odds ratios for the association of gender and cleft type with tooth agenesis were obtained. Tooth agenesis was substantially higher at the unilateral right CL + P and the bilateral CL + P in quadrant 1 and at the unilateral left CL + P and bilateral CL + P in quadrant 2. It was also higher, at the isolated cleft palate (CP) in quadrants 3 and 4. These results were attributed to teeth 22 (31.8%) and 12 (21.6%) in the maxilla and to teeth 35 (6.1%) and 45 (5.4%) in the mandible. In unilateral CL + P patients, the cleft quadrant that presented tooth agenesis was associated with the side of the cleft.ConclusionsInterdisciplinary treatment of the oral cleft patients should take into consideration the high prevalence of tooth agenesis and their association with the different cleft types. The most frequently affected teeth by cleft are by far the upper lateral incisors. Results indicate that tooth agenesis appears to be a genetically controlled anomaly related to the orofacial cleft development through various genetic links and not caused by the cleft disruptive process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence of tooth agenesis and structural dental anomalies in association with cleft type in non-syndromic oral cleft patients

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A possible explanation for this association is that genes related to tooth agenesis also may influence the early phase of the palatal closuring process. These findings reinforce the hypothesis of a common genetic background for palate cleft and tooth agenesis, in agreement with literature reports for unilateral cleft lip and palate (15,25).…”

Section: Dental Anomaly Groupsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…The occurrence of cleft palate and the development of tooth germs have a close embryological relationship between chronological and anatomical terms, and several studies have reported the manifestation of dental anomalies associated with several forms of cleft lip, cleft palate, or both (13,23). The pattern of associated dental anomalies has been studied in patients without clefts (2,(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)24), and the studies about these dental anomalies in patients with oral clefts are few (14,15,25).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Second premolar agenesis as a subclinical phenotype of isolated cleft palate

Schwartz¹,

Lauris

Dalben

et al. 2016

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cleft patients have considerably more dental anomalies than non-cleft patients [ 1 ]. Certain key genetic disturbances have been implicated in both dental anomalies and clefting, suggesting a shared genetic etiology in some cases [ 2 , 3 ]. Among many dental anomalies reported in CLP patients, small tooth size is frequently reported [ 3 - 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Is missing maxillary lateral incisor in complete cleft lip and palate a product of genetics or local environment?

Cited by 23 publications

References 44 publications

A cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence of tooth agenesis and structural dental anomalies in association with cleft type in non-syndromic oral cleft patients

A cross-sectional analysis of the prevalence of tooth agenesis and structural dental anomalies in association with cleft type in non-syndromic oral cleft patients

Second premolar agenesis as a subclinical phenotype of isolated cleft palate

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About