Objective: In patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate, scar tissue produced by palatoplasty causes maxillary dental arch constriction, palatal area decrease, and tooth rotation. Two-stage palatoplasty reportedly results in better maxillary bone development than one-stage palatoplasty; however, few studies have reported the effects of different surgical techniques on tooth axis and dental arch morphology. We report the effects of different surgical techniques on the morphology of the palate, tooth axis, and dental arch.
Methods: Patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate who presented to the Department of Orthodontics, Chiba Dental Center, Tokyo Dental College, were categorized into one-stage palatoplasty (one-stage) and two-stage palatoplasty (two-stage) groups. A plaster model of the maxillary dentition at the time of initial examination was reconstructed using a 3D dental image created with a 3D scanner, and measurements were taken using 3D measurement software.
Results: Compared with the one-stage group, the two-stage group showed no significant difference in dental arch width. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in the arch width in the two-stage group. The palatal height diameter was less in the first molar region. The palatal cross-sectional area was greater between the deciduous canines but smaller between the first molars in the two-stage group. The palatal surface area was greater between the deciduous canines. In both surgical methods, the central incisor of the affected side showed mesiolingual rotation. In the one-stage group, the first molar of the affected side showed mesiolingual rotation, and in both the one- and two-stage groups, the central incisor of the affected side showed distal tipping. The anterior segmental angle of the affected side was significantly greater and the posterior segmental angle was significantly smaller in both surgical methods; however, no significant difference was observed between the surgical methods.
Discussion: In the two-stage group, the maxillary arch length was significantly greater in all regions, suggesting that the suppression of the anterior–posterior development of the maxillary arch and palate was less. In both surgical techniques, anterior constriction of the dental arch due to rotation of the lesser segment into the alveolar cleft was observed, suggesting that the difference in rotation of the small segment did not depend on the surgical technique.
View full abstract