Outcome of gingivoperiosteoplasty for the treatment of alveolar clefts in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate

Yi Chin Wang, Yu Fang Liao, Philip Kuo Ting Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) has produced inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of GPP on the production of bone and maxillary growth. We analysed postoperative cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scans and intraoral dental photographs of 25 children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who were treated with GPP at the same time as their primary repair of the lip. Residual cleft defects and unsupported root ratios of central incisors adjacent to clefts were measured from scans. Dental arch relations were assessed from photographs using the Goslon (Great Ormond Street London and Oslo) yardstick. Eighteen children did not require secondary alveolar bone grafts. Residual cleft defects varied by site (20.4 mm3, 38.6 mm3, 88.2 mm3, and 135.2 mm3 for buccal coronal, palatal coronal, buccal apical, and palatal apical defects, respectively; p < 0.001). Unsupported root ratios did not differ significantly between coronal and apical central incisors adjacent to clefts. The mean (SD) Goslon score was 4.52 (0.51). Most participants (n = 18) who had a GPP did not need secondary alveolar bone grafting. GPP resulted in least bone on the palatal apical portion of the previous alveolar cleft and relatively good periodontal bony support of central incisors adjacent to the cleft. We no longer use GPP because of our concerns about maxillary growth.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)650-655
Number of pages6
JournalBritish Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Volume51
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cleft Lip
Cleft Palate
Incisor
Cheek
Alveolar Bone Grafting
Dental Arch
Bone and Bones
Bone Development
Lip
Tooth
Prospective Studies
Transplants
Growth

Keywords

  • Alveolar bone
  • Bone grafting
  • Cleft lip and palate
  • Computed tomography
  • Growth and development

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oral Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Surgery

Cite this

Outcome of gingivoperiosteoplasty for the treatment of alveolar clefts in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. / Wang, Yi Chin; Liao, Yu Fang; Chen, Philip Kuo Ting.

In: British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Vol. 51, No. 7, 01.10.2013, p. 650-655.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{300aa6218ceb47eeb7ec5ae96985b931,
title = "Outcome of gingivoperiosteoplasty for the treatment of alveolar clefts in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate",
abstract = "Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) has produced inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of GPP on the production of bone and maxillary growth. We analysed postoperative cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scans and intraoral dental photographs of 25 children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who were treated with GPP at the same time as their primary repair of the lip. Residual cleft defects and unsupported root ratios of central incisors adjacent to clefts were measured from scans. Dental arch relations were assessed from photographs using the Goslon (Great Ormond Street London and Oslo) yardstick. Eighteen children did not require secondary alveolar bone grafts. Residual cleft defects varied by site (20.4 mm3, 38.6 mm3, 88.2 mm3, and 135.2 mm3 for buccal coronal, palatal coronal, buccal apical, and palatal apical defects, respectively; p < 0.001). Unsupported root ratios did not differ significantly between coronal and apical central incisors adjacent to clefts. The mean (SD) Goslon score was 4.52 (0.51). Most participants (n = 18) who had a GPP did not need secondary alveolar bone grafting. GPP resulted in least bone on the palatal apical portion of the previous alveolar cleft and relatively good periodontal bony support of central incisors adjacent to the cleft. We no longer use GPP because of our concerns about maxillary growth.",
keywords = "Alveolar bone, Bone grafting, Cleft lip and palate, Computed tomography, Growth and development",
author = "Wang, {Yi Chin} and Liao, {Yu Fang} and Chen, {Philip Kuo Ting}",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.bjoms.2012.09.012",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "650--655",
journal = "British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery",
issn = "0266-4356",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcome of gingivoperiosteoplasty for the treatment of alveolar clefts in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate

AU - Wang, Yi Chin

AU - Liao, Yu Fang

AU - Chen, Philip Kuo Ting

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) has produced inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of GPP on the production of bone and maxillary growth. We analysed postoperative cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scans and intraoral dental photographs of 25 children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who were treated with GPP at the same time as their primary repair of the lip. Residual cleft defects and unsupported root ratios of central incisors adjacent to clefts were measured from scans. Dental arch relations were assessed from photographs using the Goslon (Great Ormond Street London and Oslo) yardstick. Eighteen children did not require secondary alveolar bone grafts. Residual cleft defects varied by site (20.4 mm3, 38.6 mm3, 88.2 mm3, and 135.2 mm3 for buccal coronal, palatal coronal, buccal apical, and palatal apical defects, respectively; p < 0.001). Unsupported root ratios did not differ significantly between coronal and apical central incisors adjacent to clefts. The mean (SD) Goslon score was 4.52 (0.51). Most participants (n = 18) who had a GPP did not need secondary alveolar bone grafting. GPP resulted in least bone on the palatal apical portion of the previous alveolar cleft and relatively good periodontal bony support of central incisors adjacent to the cleft. We no longer use GPP because of our concerns about maxillary growth.

AB - Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) has produced inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of GPP on the production of bone and maxillary growth. We analysed postoperative cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scans and intraoral dental photographs of 25 children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who were treated with GPP at the same time as their primary repair of the lip. Residual cleft defects and unsupported root ratios of central incisors adjacent to clefts were measured from scans. Dental arch relations were assessed from photographs using the Goslon (Great Ormond Street London and Oslo) yardstick. Eighteen children did not require secondary alveolar bone grafts. Residual cleft defects varied by site (20.4 mm3, 38.6 mm3, 88.2 mm3, and 135.2 mm3 for buccal coronal, palatal coronal, buccal apical, and palatal apical defects, respectively; p < 0.001). Unsupported root ratios did not differ significantly between coronal and apical central incisors adjacent to clefts. The mean (SD) Goslon score was 4.52 (0.51). Most participants (n = 18) who had a GPP did not need secondary alveolar bone grafting. GPP resulted in least bone on the palatal apical portion of the previous alveolar cleft and relatively good periodontal bony support of central incisors adjacent to the cleft. We no longer use GPP because of our concerns about maxillary growth.

KW - Alveolar bone

KW - Bone grafting

KW - Cleft lip and palate

KW - Computed tomography

KW - Growth and development

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883761410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883761410&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bjoms.2012.09.012

DO - 10.1016/j.bjoms.2012.09.012

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 650

EP - 655

JO - British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

JF - British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

SN - 0266-4356

IS - 7

ER -