Survey of 300 Chinese Cleft Palate Patients Presenting for Recall to a Dental Department in Hong Kong

Abstract

Three hundred Chinese patients with cleft lip and/or palate were reviewed in the Dentofacial Deformities Clinic of the Department of Dentistry at the United Christian Hospital between January 1990 and January 1992. A survey was taken of patients' age, sex, type of cleft, and cleft location. The findings from this survey are compared to an original sample of 2800 cleft patients surveyed earlier.

Isolated soft tissue cleft lip: epidemiology and associated dental anomalies

“…Shapira et al (Shapira et al , 1999) reported a prevalence rate of 2.1%, equally distributed between male and female patients, quite similar to the one we found in our study (2.8%). These findings contradict the findings of many studies which have emphasized sex dimorphism in orofacial clefts, where CLP occurs more frequently in male and CP occurs most often in female patients (Chow, 1994; Vallino‐Napoli et al , 2004; Aizenbud et al , 2005; Lai et al , 2008). This contradiction may account for the attenuated form of cleft morphology as depicted in ICL i.e.…”

“…The most common dental anomaly for the cleft‐affected population – LI hypodontia – clearly positions the ICL‐affected population as a hybrid between the normal population and the osseous cleft‐affected population (CLP & CLA) as depicted in Figure 3. Furthermore, the gender distribution of our ICL‐affected patients, which is with equal prevalence among male and female patients, corroborates this evidence as sex dimorphism for the osseous cleft‐affected population was not recorded (Chow, 1994; Vallino‐Napoli et al , 2004; Aizenbud et al , 2005; Lai et al , 2008). The 2 PM hypodontia prevalence maintains this segregation trend, although the differences are not statistically significant (Figure 3).…”

“…As these types are considered variations of the same developmental anomaly, their prevalence should be recorded separately (Turvey et al , 1996). Several authors have presented data regarding cleft lip‐affected patients but their publications did not specify the exact definition and inclusive criteria for these patients (Chow, 1994; Vallino‐Napoli et al , 2004). Whether their study groups included ICL‐affected patients or cleft lip‐affected patients which also present alveolar bone involvement up to the incisive foramen (known as CLA) is usually unclear.…”

“…A larger sample of ICL phenotype might be obtained by a multicenter epidemiologic study, which could clarify the assumption that gender pre‐dilections are proportionately higher as clefting severity increases. Many studies have presented left side pre‐dominance for the cleft anomaly (Bishara and Iversen, 1974; Goose and Appleton, 1982; Athanasiou et al , 1987; Normando et al , 1992; Chow, 1994; Vallino‐Napoli et al , 2004). Our findings support this assumption for the ICL‐affected population.…”

Challenges in maxillofacial reconstruction on secondary cleft deformities

“…Specialists would participate and contribute their expertise in a supportive and coordinated manner. This concept of team care follows the evolving historic trends in cleft lip and palate patient management at the United Christian Hospital dated back to the early years of huge primary cleft repair service to approximately 2800 cleft patients before 1989 1 . This is in pace with the key requirements to ensure good quality of service by multidisciplinary care as stated by Cooper 2 in the early 1930s and more recently in the ‘Cleft Lip and/or Palate Report of a Clinical Standards Advisory Group Committee’ by the United Kingdom (1998) 3…”