| 1. |
- Botticelli, Susanna, et al.
(author)
-
Do Infant Cleft Dimensions Have an Influence on Occlusal Relations? A Subgroup Analysis Within an RCT of Primary Surgery in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate
- 2020
-
In: The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. - : Sage Publications. - 1055-6656 .- 1545-1569. ; 57:3, s. 378-388
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aim: To investigate whether infant cleft dimensions, in a surgical protocol with early or delayed hard palate closure, influence occlusion before orthodontics.less thanbr /greater thanDesign: Subgroup analysis within a randomized trial of primary surgery (Scandcleft).less thanbr /greater thanSetting: Tertiary health care. One surgical centre.less thanbr /greater thanPatients and Methods: A total of 122 unilateral cleft lip and palate infants received primary cheilo-rhinoplasty and soft palate closure at age 4 months and were randomized for hard palate closure at age 12 versus 36 months. A novel 3D analysis of cleft size and morphology was performed on digitized presurgical models. Occlusion was scored on 8-year models using the modified Huddarth-Bodenham (MHB) Index and the Goslon Yardstick.less thanbr /greater thanMain Outcome Measurements: Differences in MHB and Goslon scores among the 2 surgical groups adjusted for cleft size.less thanbr /greater thanResults: The crude analysis showed no difference between the 2 surgical groups in Goslon scores but a better MHB (P = .006) for the group who received delayed hard palate closure. When adjusting for the ratio between cleft surface and palatal surface (3D Infant Cleft Severity Ratio) and for posterior cleft dimensions at tuberosity level, the delayed hard palate closure group received 3.65 points better for MHB (confidence interval: 1.81; 5.48; P less than .001) and showed a trend for reduced risk of receiving a Goslon of 4 or 5 (P = .052). For posterior clefts larger than 9 mm, the Goslon score was better in the delayed hard palate closure group (P = .033).less thanbr /greater thanConclusions: Seen from an orthodontic perspective, when the soft palate is closed first, and the cleft is large, the timing of hard palate closure should be planned in relation to posterior cleft size.
|
|
| 2. |
- Heliövaara, Arja, et al.
(author)
-
Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate. Dental arch relationships in 8 year-olds.
- 2020
-
In: European journal of orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2210 .- 0141-5387. ; 42:1, s. 1-7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Scandcleft intercentre study evaluates the outcomes of four surgical protocols for treatment of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Originally 10 cleft centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, and the UK participated in a set of three randomized trials of primary surgery. Three groups of centres (Trials 1, 2, and 3) tested their traditional local surgical protocols (Arms B, C, and D) against a common protocol (Arm A).To evaluate dental arch relationships at age 8 years after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP. These results are secondary outcomes of the overall trial.Study models of 411 children (270 boys, 141 girls) with non-syndromic UCLP at a mean age of 8.1 (range 7.0-10.0) years were available. Dental arch relationships were analysed using the GOSLON Yardstick by a blinded panel of 11 orthodontists. To assess reliability, Kappa statistics were calculated. The trials were tested statistically with t-tests.Comparisons within each trial showed no statistically significant differences in the mean 8-year index scores or their distributions between the common protocol and the local team protocol. The mean index scores were Trial 1: Arm A 3.03, Arm B 2.82, Trial 2: Arm A 2.78, Arm C 2.64, and Trial 3: Arm A 3.06, Arm D 3.08. Comparisons between the trials detected a significantly (P < 0.005) better mean index score Trial 2 Arm C than in Trial 3 Arm D. The intra- and inter-rater reliabilities were acceptable.The results of these three trials do not provide evidence that one surgical protocol is better than the others.ISRCTN29932826.
|
|
| 3. |
- Karsten, Agneta, et al.
(author)
-
Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: occlusion in 8-year-olds according to the Modified Huddart and Bodenham index.
- 2020
-
In: European journal of orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2210 .- 0141-5387. ; 42:1, s. 15-23
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Scandcleft international multicenter study is a prospective clinical trial of the long-term outcome after four different surgical protocols for palatal closure in patients born with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). This paper is one of a series of follow-up studies in 8-year olds.To evaluate the dental occlusion of 8-year-old patients after four different protocols of primary surgery for UCLP.Ten cleft centres in five countries tested three different surgical procedures for primary palatal repair in three parallel trials (Arms B, C, and D) against a common procedure (Arm A).Initially 448 children born with non-syndromic UCLP were included in the project. At 8 years of age, 428 children remained in the study. Dental casts of 411 patients (270 boys, 141 girls), mean age 8.1 years (range 7.0-10.0) were taken. The casts were blindly assessed with the Modified Huddart and Bodenham (MHB) index by four orthodontists. The main outcome measures were anterior (+2 to -6) and posterior (0 to -8) mean scores. Comparisons were made with previous data in 5-year-olds.The inter- and intra-examiner reliability was good to excellent (0.75-0.90; 0.73-0.97), respectively. The mean total scores varied from -7.09 (Trial 2C) to -10.13 (Trial 3D). The mean anterior scores varied from -1.75 (Trial 2C) to -3.18 (Trial 1A). The mean posterior cleft-side scores varied from -4.32 (Trial 1B) to -5.21 (Trial 3D) and the mean non-cleft-side scores varied from -0.88 (Trial 2C) to -2.40 (Trial 3A). No significant differences were found within the trials. A significant difference was found between Trials 2 and 3 (Arm C/D) for the total score (P = 0.004).There was no evidence of clinically significant differences in occlusion between the two surgical methods in each trial or between the trials. All mean scores showed more negative values in 8-year-olds compared with previously reported values in 5-year-olds.ISRCTN29932826.
|
|
| 4. |
- Küseler, Annelise, et al.
(author)
-
Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: maxillary growth at eight years of age
- 2020
-
In: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 42:1, s. 24-29
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To assess differences in craniofacial growth at 8 years of age according to the different protocols for primary cleft surgery in the Scandcleft project.less thanbr /greater thanDesign and Setting: Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial (RCT) involving 10 centres, including non-syndromic Caucasians with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). In Trial 1, a common surgical method (1a) with soft palate closure at 3-4 months of age and hard palate closure at 12 months of age was tested against similar surgery but with hard palate repair at 36 months (delayed hard palate closure) (1b). In Trial 2, the common method (2a) was tested against simultaneous closure of both hard and soft palate at 1 year (2c). In Trial 3, the common method (3a) was tested against hard palate closure together with lip closure at 3 months of age and soft palate closure at 1 year of age (3d). Participants were randomly allocated by use of a dice. Operator blinding was not possible but all raters of all outcomes were blinded.less thanbr /greater thanSubjects and Methods: The total number of participating patients at 8 years of age was 429. Lateral cephalograms (n = 408) were analysed. The cephalometric angles SNA and ANB were chosen for assessing maxillary growth for this part of the presentation.less thanbr /greater thanResults: Within each trial (Trial 1a/1b, Trial 2a/2c, and Trial 3a/3d), there was no difference in cephalometric values between the common and the local arm. There were no statistically significant differences in the SNA and ANB angles between the common arm in Trial 1a (mean SNA 77.8, mean ANB 2.6) and Trial 2a (mean SNA 79.8, mean ANB 3.6) and no difference between Trial 1a and Trial 3a, but a statistical difference could be seen between Trial 2a and Trial 3a (mean SNA 76.9, mean ANB 1.7). However, the confidence interval was rather large. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were within acceptable range.less thanbr /greater thanConclusions: The timing and the surgical method is not of major importance as far as growth outcomes (SNA and ANB) in UCLP are concerned.less thanbr /greater thanRegistration: ISRCTN29932826.less thanbr /greater thanProtocol: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.less thanbr /greater than (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)
|
|
| 5. |
- Küseler, Annelise, et al.
(author)
-
Scandcleft randomized trials of primary surgery for unilateral cleft lip and palate: maxillary growth at eight years of age.
- 2020
-
In: European journal of orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1460-2210 .- 0141-5387. ; 42:1, s. 24-29
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To assess differences in craniofacial growth at 8 years of age according to the different protocols for primary cleft surgery in the Scandcleft project.Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial (RCT) involving 10 centres, including non-syndromic Caucasians with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). In Trial 1, a common surgical method (1a) with soft palate closure at 3-4 months of age and hard palate closure at 12 months of age was tested against similar surgery but with hard palate repair at 36 months (delayed hard palate closure) (1b). In Trial 2, the common method (2a) was tested against simultaneous closure of both hard and soft palate at 1 year (2c). In Trial 3, the common method (3a) was tested against hard palate closure together with lip closure at 3 months of age and soft palate closure at 1 year of age (3d). Participants were randomly allocated by use of a dice. Operator blinding was not possible but all raters of all outcomes were blinded.The total number of participating patients at 8 years of age was 429. Lateral cephalograms (n = 408) were analysed. The cephalometric angles SNA and ANB were chosen for assessing maxillary growth for this part of the presentation.Within each trial (Trial 1a/1b, Trial 2a/2c, and Trial 3a/3d), there was no difference in cephalometric values between the common and the local arm. There were no statistically significant differences in the SNA and ANB angles between the common arm in Trial 1a (mean SNA 77.8, mean ANB 2.6) and Trial 2a (mean SNA 79.8, mean ANB 3.6) and no difference between Trial 1a and Trial 3a, but a statistical difference could be seen between Trial 2a and Trial 3a (mean SNA 76.9, mean ANB 1.7). However, the confidence interval was rather large. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were within acceptable range.The timing and the surgical method is not of major importance as far as growth outcomes (SNA and ANB) in UCLP are concerned.ISRCTN29932826.The protocol was not published before trial commencement.
|
|
