RSS-Feed abonnieren

DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1795121
The Characteristic of Transverse Dental Arch Relationship Study in Unilateral Cleft and Palate versus Noncleft in Thai Northeastern Population
Funding This study was supported by The Center of Cleft Lip-Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Deformities, Khon Kaen University under Tawanchai Royal Grant Project (Grant Number TWG6408).

Abstract
Objectives To evaluate and compare the transverse dental arch relationship of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) versus the noncleft controls in Northeastern region of Thailand.
Materials and Methods A cross-sectional study involving 80 participants comprising 40 nonsyndromic children with UCLP and 40 healthy noncleft children of similar age (mean age: 11 years). The study was conducted at the Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Thailand. Each participant underwent assessments for Angle's classification, overjet, overbite, and transverse dental arch width, along with the evaluation of the modified Huddart/Bodenham (MHB) index using three-dimensional digital dental casts. Comparisons between groups were performed using paired sample t-tests and nonparametric Mann–Whitney tests, with a significance level established at p < 0.05.
Results The sample was categorized into two groups: the early mixed dentition group (ages 7–10 years) and the late mixed dentition group (ages 11–14 years). In the antero-posterior plane, individuals with UCLP and those without cleft presented with class II Angle's classification. In the transverse plane, the maxillary transverse arch width was notably narrower in UCLP cases compared with noncleft cases, with more pronounced differences observed in the late mixed dentition group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in mandibular transverse width between the two groups. The mean MHB index scores were −9.35 in the early mixed dentition group and −12.63 in the late mixed dentition group, indicating a more severe score in the latter. When compared with the noncleft control group, both UCLP groups showed significantly lower MHB index scores.
Conclusion In comparison to noncleft individuals, the majority of UCLP cases exhibited class II angles with negative overjet. A significantly smaller transverse arch width was observed in the maxilla of UCLP patients, with no significant variances noted in the mandible. Analysis using the MHB index indicated greater total arch constriction in UCLP cases, particularly in the anterior tooth region. Furthermore, the severity of these findings was observed to escalate with age.
Keywords
unilateral cleft lip and palate - Angle's classification - overjet - overbite - transverse arch width - modified Huddart/Bodenham indexEthical Approval
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Khon Kaen University (Ethics Code: HE652105) on September 9, 2022. All participants provided written informed consent prior to enrolment in the study. This research was conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
Authors' Contributions
Conceptualization: A.M.; Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation: N.W.; Writing—original draft preparation: N.W.; Writing—review and editing: A.M.; Visualization: A.P., A.M.; Supervision: A.P., A.M.; Project administration: A.M.; Final approval: A.M.; Agreed to be accountable A.M.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
24. April 2025
© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Worley ML, Patel KG, Kilpatrick LA. Cleft lip and palate. Clin Perinatol 2018; 45 (04) 661-678
- 2 Tindlund RS, Rygh P. Soft-tissue profile changes during widening and protraction of the maxilla in patients with cleft lip and palate compared with normal growth and development. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1993; 30 (05) 454-468
- 3 Wongsirichat N, Mahardawi B, Manosudprasit M, Manosudprasit A, Wongsirichat N. The prevalence of cleft lip and palate and their effect on growth and development: a narrative review. Siriraj Med J 2022; 74 (11) 819-827
- 4 Paradowska-Stolarz A, Kawala B. Occlusal disorders among patients with total clefts of lip, alveolar bone, and palate. BioMed Res Int 2014; 2014: 583416
- 5 Vallino LD, Zuker R, Napoli JA. A study of speech, language, hearing, and dentition in children with cleft lip only. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2008; 45 (05) 485-494
- 6 Pruzansky S, Aduss H. Arch form and the deciduous occlusion in complete unilateral clefts. Cleft Palate J 1964; 30: 411-418
- 7 Matthews D, Broomhead I, Grossmann W, Orth D, Goldin H. Early and late bone grafting in cases of cleft lip and palate. Br J Plast Surg 1970; 23 (02) 115-129
- 8 Mars M, Plint DA, Houston WJ, Bergland O, Semb G. The Goslon Yardstick: a new system of assessing dental arch relationships in children with unilateral clefts of the lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 1987; 24 (04) 314-322
- 9 Friede H, Enemark H, Semb G. et al. Craniofacial and occlusal characteristics in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients from four Scandinavian centres. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1991; 25 (03) 269-276
- 10 Atack NE, Hathorn IS, Semb G, Dowell T, Sandy JR. A new index for assessing surgical outcome in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects aged five: reproducibility and validity. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 1997; 34 (03) 242-246
- 11 Ozawa TO, Shaw WC, Katsaros C. et al. A new yardstick for rating dental arch relationship in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2011; 48 (02) 167-172
- 12 Huddart AG, Bodenham RS. The evaluation of arch form and occlusion in unilateral cleft palate subjects. Cleft Palate J 1972; 9: 194-209
- 13 Gray D, Mossey PA. Evaluation of a modified Huddart/Bodenham scoring system for assessment of maxillary arch constriction in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects. Eur J Orthod 2005; 27 (05) 507-511
- 14 Altalibi M, Saltaji H, Edwards R, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Indices to assess malocclusions in patients with cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod 2013; 35 (06) 772-782
- 15 Haque S, Alam MK, Arshad AI. An overview of indices used to measure treatment effectiveness in patients with cleft lip and palate. Malays J Med Sci 2015; 22 (01) 4-11
- 16 Baraka M, Hanno A, Bakry NS, Medra A, Moussa H. Transverse dental arch relationship and occlusion in surgically repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate egyptian children. J Medical Clinical Research Reviews 2017; 1 (02) 1-7
- 17 Keski-Nisula K, Lehto R, Lusa V, Keski-Nisula L, Varrela J. Occurrence of malocclusion and need of orthodontic treatment in early mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124 (06) 631-638
- 18 Yu X, Zhang H, Sun L, Pan J, Liu Y, Chen L. Prevalence of malocclusion and occlusal traits in the early mixed dentition in Shanghai, China. PeerJ 2019; 7 (04) e6630
- 19 Melsen B. Palatal growth studied on human autopsy material. A histologic microradiographic study. Am J Orthod 1975; 68 (01) 42-54
- 20 Mendes CS, Santos KMD, Gerber JT. et al. Variation of tooth crown size in cleft lip and palate patients. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023; 24 (04) 207-213
- 21 Angelieri F, Cevidanes LHS, Franchi L, Gonçalves JR, Benavides E, McNamara Jr JA. Midpalatal suture maturation: classification method for individual assessment before rapid maxillary expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144 (05) 759-769
- 22 Björk A, Skieller V. Growth in width of the maxilla studied by the implant method. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1974; 8 (1–2): 26-33
- 23 Generali C, Primozic J, Richmond S. et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of the maxillary arch and palate in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects using digital dental casts. Eur J Orthod 2017; 39 (06) 641-645
- 24 Baraka M, Hanno A, Bakry N, Medra AM, Moussa H. Dental arch dimensions in surgically repaired unilateral cleft lip and palate of egyptian children by Oslo Protocol. Alex Dent J 2016; 41 (01) 111-116
- 25 Gopinath VK, Samsudin AR, Mohd Noor SNF, Mohamed Sharab HY. Facial profile and maxillary arch dimensions in unilateral cleft lip and palate children in the mixed dentition stage. Eur J Dent 2017; 11 (01) 76-82
- 26 Athanasiou AE, Mazaheri M, Zarrinnia K. Dental arch dimensions in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 1988; 25 (02) 139-145
- 27 Wahaj A, Ahmed I. Comparison of intercanine and intermolar width between cleft lip palate and normal class I occlusion group. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2015; 25 (11) 811-814
- 28 Asquith JA, McIntyre GT. Dental arch relationships on three-dimensional digital study models and conventional plaster study models for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2012; 49 (05) 530-534
- 29 Antonarakis GS, Adibfar A, Tompson BD, Daskalogiannakis J, Fisher DM. Presurgical cleft lip anthropometrics and dental arch relationships in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2015; 52 (03) 269-276
- 30 Arshad AI, Alam MK, Khamis MF. Dentoalveolar cleft treatment outcome using modified Huddart-Bodenham Index and regression analysis of associated factors. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2018; 55 (05) 682-687
- 31 Haque S, Alam MK, Khamis MF. Treatment outcome of Bangladeshi UCLP patients based on both phenotype and postnatal treatment factors using modified Huddart Bodenham (mHB) index. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2018; 55 (07) 966-973
- 32 Dahl E, Hanusardóttir B. Prevalence of malocclusion in the primary and early mixed dentition in Danish children with complete cleft lip and palate. Eur J Orthod 1979; 1 (02) 81-88
- 33 Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods 2007; 39 (02) 175-191