2012
DOI: 10.1597/10-190
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Palate Dimensions in Six-Year-Old Children with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Six-Center Study on Dental Casts

Abstract: At 6 years of age, children with stepwise repair and hard palate closure after the age of two more frequently result in palatal dimensions of noncleft control than children with earlier palatal closure and one-stage cleft repair.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(33 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many studies have successfully used dental models to determine dental arch relationships Attack et al, 1997;Williams et al, 2001, Bearn et al, 2001Sandy et al, 2005;Long et al, 2011;Ozawa et al, 2011;koszelj etal., 2012;Dogan et al, 2014). Dental arch relationships are said to be reliable indicators of facial growth and predictors of treatment outcome (Harthorn et al, 1990;Ozawa et al, 2011;koszelj et al, 2012;Noveraz et al, 2014)). There are other ways of determining dental arch relationships apart from using dental models, such as using cephalometic x-rays and photographs Mostled et al, 1992;Asher Mc-Dade et al, 1992;Daskalogiannakis et al, 2011;Bartzela et al, 2012).Though use of cephalometric x-rays has been reported to be limited in patients with abnormalities such as cleft, because some land marks may be difficult to identify because of the distortion of the maxillary structures (Mostled et al, 1992).…”
Section: Dental Study Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Many studies have successfully used dental models to determine dental arch relationships Attack et al, 1997;Williams et al, 2001, Bearn et al, 2001Sandy et al, 2005;Long et al, 2011;Ozawa et al, 2011;koszelj etal., 2012;Dogan et al, 2014). Dental arch relationships are said to be reliable indicators of facial growth and predictors of treatment outcome (Harthorn et al, 1990;Ozawa et al, 2011;koszelj et al, 2012;Noveraz et al, 2014)). There are other ways of determining dental arch relationships apart from using dental models, such as using cephalometic x-rays and photographs Mostled et al, 1992;Asher Mc-Dade et al, 1992;Daskalogiannakis et al, 2011;Bartzela et al, 2012).Though use of cephalometric x-rays has been reported to be limited in patients with abnormalities such as cleft, because some land marks may be difficult to identify because of the distortion of the maxillary structures (Mostled et al, 1992).…”
Section: Dental Study Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comprehensive cleft care is the gold standard for cleft care, but seems an uphill task to achieve in Nigeria, going by reports from previous studies (Olasoji et al, 2011;Oginni et al, 2014), the main form of care offered in Nigeria hospitals still remain primary surgical repair of lip and palate. The importance of comprehensive cleft care has been reported previously (Grunwell et al, 2000;Nolletetal.,2005;Fudalej et al, 2009;KosZelj et al, 2012;Peanchitlertkajorn eral., 2011;Bartzela et al, 2010). This can be seen in the United Kingdom where cleft care services was re organised based on a report of poor treatment outcomes .…”
Section: Systematic Review Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%