Three-dimensional radiological evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting in cleft lip and palate patients: a systematic review

Abstract

The search yielded 1735 citations, of which 38 met the inclusion criteria. We noticed a large variability in imaging protocols and bone graft evaluation methods between studies. Most articles were observational studies with medium to low methodological quality, except for the one randomised clinical trial having a low risk of bias. Conclusions: There is a lack of prospective, controlled trials based on a consistent imaging protocol with a sufficiently long follow-up period. A pressing need exists for the development of a consistent optimized imaging protocol for diagnosis and follow up of SABG in CLP patients. Although 3D evaluation methods seem to be more precise than two-dimensional methods, we should be careful when comparing the outcomes arising from different 3D measuring techniques.

Comparison of 2- and 3-dimensional radiologic evaluation of secondary alveolar bone grafting of clefts: a systematic review

“…On 3-D evaluation, although volume was determined in different ways in the included studies by using several available volume-rendering software programs, the techniques were quite comparable. 35 Segmentation and integration were performed semiautomatically, and calculations were performed by the computer software according to a particular formula. 3,15,[34][35][36][37][38] The accuracy of volumetric analysis in 3-D software has been confirmed by many studies.…”

“…35 Segmentation and integration were performed semiautomatically, and calculations were performed by the computer software according to a particular formula. 3,15,[34][35][36][37][38] The accuracy of volumetric analysis in 3-D software has been confirmed by many studies. 39 Although quantitative comparison of 2-D and 3-D data is difficult because of study heterogeneity, 2-D evaluation seemed to indicate better outcomes than 3-D evaluation.…”

“…The question as to whether SABG can be performed on older patients remains controversial, but canine development stage has more reference value compared with physiologic age. 35 In addition, it was difficult to determine whether orthodontic treatment before SABG affected the success rate of the grafts. Surgeons evaluate the alveolar cleft condition and the SABG surgical difficulty on an individual basis and schedule orthodontic therapy before SABG if that would be helpful.…”

Comparative Volume Analysis of Alveolar Defects by 3D Simulation

“…Two-dimensional radiography has routinely been used for the diagnostic evaluation and treatment planning of maxillary alveolar cleft defect reconstructions [3,4]; however, this imaging modality is associated with drawbacks, such as no volumetric information, enlargement, distortion, and overlap of anatomical structures, and limitations for anatomical landmarks identification, thus affecting the accurate planning [5,6]. Conventional computed tomography (CT) scans have also been used to assess ABG-related outcomes because they provide precise and accurate representations of the anatomical structures and pathological processes [7,8], but CT is associated with high-dose ionizing radiation exposure, especially for patients at the developmental age [9,10]. Cone beam CT (CBCT) presents high-quality three-dimensional (3D) image acquisition and reconstruction parameters (including maxillary alveolar anatomical boundaries) and low radiation dose and cost.…”

“…Cone beam CT (CBCT) presents high-quality three-dimensional (3D) image acquisition and reconstruction parameters (including maxillary alveolar anatomical boundaries) and low radiation dose and cost. Consequently, CBCT has increasingly been adopted for ABG-related diagnostic and treatment assessments [7,8].…”