The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate

Cindy Hsin Yi Hsieh, Ellen Wen Ching Ko, Philip Kuo Ting Chen, Chiung Shing Huang

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

42 引文 (Scopus)

摘要

Objective: Gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of lip repair of cleft patients is one kind of alveolar repair. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective study. Patients: Sixty-two consecutive patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip/palate with 5-year-olds' record were included in this retrospective study. Interventions: All the patients had received nasoalveolar molding treatment before cheiloplasty at the age of 3 to 6 months. Twenty-six patients had gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the GPP group. Thirty-six patients did not have gingivoperiosteoplasty at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the non-GPP group. Main Outcome Measures: Cephalometry was used to evaluate the facial growth at 5 years of age in the two groups of patients. Results: Gingivoperiosteoplasty had significant effects on the maxillary position (SNA), intermaxillary position (ANB), maxillary length (PMP-ANS), and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) at the age of 5 years. The SNA and ANB angles were larger in non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 3.0° and 2.6°, respectively. The maxillary length (PMP-ANS) and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) were larger in the non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 2.1 and 2.9 mm, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with UCLP, the sagittal growth of the maxilla would be affectedmore adversely in the GPP group than in the non-GPP group at the age of 5 years.
原文英語
頁(從 - 到)439-446
頁數8
期刊Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
47
發行號5
DOIs
出版狀態已發佈 - 九月 1 2010
對外發佈Yes

指紋

Cleft Lip
Cleft Palate
Growth
Retrospective Studies
Cephalometry
Maxilla
Age Groups
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Oral Surgery

引用此文

The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. / Hsieh, Cindy Hsin Yi; Ko, Ellen Wen Ching; Chen, Philip Kuo Ting; Huang, Chiung Shing.

於: Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 卷 47, 編號 5, 01.09.2010, p. 439-446.

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

Hsieh, Cindy Hsin Yi ; Ko, Ellen Wen Ching ; Chen, Philip Kuo Ting ; Huang, Chiung Shing. / The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. 於: Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. 2010 ; 卷 47, 編號 5. 頁 439-446.
@article{95d6e0f373c64d60a1c916831df220ea,
title = "The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate",
abstract = "Objective: Gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of lip repair of cleft patients is one kind of alveolar repair. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective study. Patients: Sixty-two consecutive patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip/palate with 5-year-olds' record were included in this retrospective study. Interventions: All the patients had received nasoalveolar molding treatment before cheiloplasty at the age of 3 to 6 months. Twenty-six patients had gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the GPP group. Thirty-six patients did not have gingivoperiosteoplasty at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the non-GPP group. Main Outcome Measures: Cephalometry was used to evaluate the facial growth at 5 years of age in the two groups of patients. Results: Gingivoperiosteoplasty had significant effects on the maxillary position (SNA), intermaxillary position (ANB), maxillary length (PMP-ANS), and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) at the age of 5 years. The SNA and ANB angles were larger in non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 3.0° and 2.6°, respectively. The maxillary length (PMP-ANS) and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) were larger in the non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 2.1 and 2.9 mm, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with UCLP, the sagittal growth of the maxilla would be affectedmore adversely in the GPP group than in the non-GPP group at the age of 5 years.",
keywords = "Facial growth, Gingivoperiosteoplasty, Unilateral cleft lip and palate",
author = "Hsieh, {Cindy Hsin Yi} and Ko, {Ellen Wen Ching} and Chen, {Philip Kuo Ting} and Huang, {Chiung Shing}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1597/08-207",
language = "English",
volume = "47",
pages = "439--446",
journal = "Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal",
issn = "1055-6656",
publisher = "American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate

AU - Hsieh, Cindy Hsin Yi

AU - Ko, Ellen Wen Ching

AU - Chen, Philip Kuo Ting

AU - Huang, Chiung Shing

PY - 2010/9/1

Y1 - 2010/9/1

N2 - Objective: Gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of lip repair of cleft patients is one kind of alveolar repair. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective study. Patients: Sixty-two consecutive patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip/palate with 5-year-olds' record were included in this retrospective study. Interventions: All the patients had received nasoalveolar molding treatment before cheiloplasty at the age of 3 to 6 months. Twenty-six patients had gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the GPP group. Thirty-six patients did not have gingivoperiosteoplasty at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the non-GPP group. Main Outcome Measures: Cephalometry was used to evaluate the facial growth at 5 years of age in the two groups of patients. Results: Gingivoperiosteoplasty had significant effects on the maxillary position (SNA), intermaxillary position (ANB), maxillary length (PMP-ANS), and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) at the age of 5 years. The SNA and ANB angles were larger in non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 3.0° and 2.6°, respectively. The maxillary length (PMP-ANS) and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) were larger in the non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 2.1 and 2.9 mm, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with UCLP, the sagittal growth of the maxilla would be affectedmore adversely in the GPP group than in the non-GPP group at the age of 5 years.

AB - Objective: Gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of lip repair of cleft patients is one kind of alveolar repair. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth of patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP). Design: Retrospective study. Patients: Sixty-two consecutive patients with nonsyndromic complete unilateral cleft lip/palate with 5-year-olds' record were included in this retrospective study. Interventions: All the patients had received nasoalveolar molding treatment before cheiloplasty at the age of 3 to 6 months. Twenty-six patients had gingivoperiosteoplasty performed at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the GPP group. Thirty-six patients did not have gingivoperiosteoplasty at the time of cheiloplasty and function as the non-GPP group. Main Outcome Measures: Cephalometry was used to evaluate the facial growth at 5 years of age in the two groups of patients. Results: Gingivoperiosteoplasty had significant effects on the maxillary position (SNA), intermaxillary position (ANB), maxillary length (PMP-ANS), and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) at the age of 5 years. The SNA and ANB angles were larger in non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 3.0° and 2.6°, respectively. The maxillary length (PMP-ANS) and maxillary alveolar length (PMP-A) were larger in the non-GPP group than in the GPP group by 2.1 and 2.9 mm, respectively. Conclusions: In patients with UCLP, the sagittal growth of the maxilla would be affectedmore adversely in the GPP group than in the non-GPP group at the age of 5 years.

KW - Facial growth

KW - Gingivoperiosteoplasty

KW - Unilateral cleft lip and palate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77956588614&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77956588614&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1597/08-207

DO - 10.1597/08-207

M3 - Article

C2 - 20180706

AN - SCOPUS:77956588614

VL - 47

SP - 439

EP - 446

JO - Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

JF - Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

SN - 1055-6656

IS - 5

ER -