Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices
Background Pre-surgical orthopedic (PSO) devices can be used in the management of patient with cleft lip/palate (CL/P) to narrow the alveolar gap (AG) prior to lip surgery. There are few studies comparing these 2 devices. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of active and passive PS...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal 2023-11, Vol.60 (11), p.1359-1365 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1365 |
---|---|
container_issue | 11 |
container_start_page | 1359 |
container_title | The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal |
container_volume | 60 |
creator | Garland, Katie Coyle, Michelle Foley, Tim Matic, Damir |
description | Background
Pre-surgical orthopedic (PSO) devices can be used in the management of patient with cleft lip/palate (CL/P) to narrow the alveolar gap (AG) prior to lip surgery. There are few studies comparing these 2 devices. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of active and passive PSO devices on facial growth in a single surgeon's cohort of patients with CL/P over a 10-year period.
Methods
A retrospective review of all patients with CL/P in a single surgeon's practice from 2002 to 2018 was performed. Preoperative measurements of AG size were done using electronic calipers on patient molds. Patient radiographs were taken at 5 and 10 years of age and cephalometric landmarks were plotted using specialized software. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means for maxillary, mandibular, vertical, and dento-alveolar growth parameters.
Results
Twenty patients with an active device and 23 patients with a passive device were included. No differences were observed in the basic demographic information between the two groups. At the time of lip repair, patients with a passive device had significantly larger horizontal AGs (P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/10556656221106891 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2676556094</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_10556656221106891</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2872129558</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-e9b3f4732e073b2d250f5db270b8955f15665fa15476ca63d439c7049bb335913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9O3DAQxq2qqNAtD9BLZamXXgL-E9vJEYVCkZBAaKuKU-Q4E9YoiYPtbNWH4J3xarcggTh5NPOb-azvQ-grJUeUKnVMiRBSCskYpUQWJf2ADqjIRUaFLD-mOs2zDbCPPodwTwgTlBWf0D5P80Ll_AA9LmHMbkF7XMG00r0bIHprcOWGSXsb3Ihdh691tDDGgP_YuMJVD11MvV5HwH9XDt-AAbuGFi896DgkcguemJja2PkEh7Aprz1kYfZ31ugeX_m4chO0Se4U1tZA-IL2Ot0HONy9C_T77Oey-pVdXp1fVCeXmeGyiBmUDe9yxRkQxRvWMkE60TZMkaYohejoxpVOJyuUNFryNuelUSQvm4ZzUVK-QD-2dyfvHmYIsR5sMND3egQ3h5pJJZO1pMwT-v0Veu9mP6bf1axQjLIkWCSKbinjXQgeunrydtD-X01JvcmqfpNV2vm2uzw3A7TPG__DScDRFgj6Dl5k37_4BInqm4Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2872129558</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Garland, Katie ; Coyle, Michelle ; Foley, Tim ; Matic, Damir</creator><creatorcontrib>Garland, Katie ; Coyle, Michelle ; Foley, Tim ; Matic, Damir</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Pre-surgical orthopedic (PSO) devices can be used in the management of patient with cleft lip/palate (CL/P) to narrow the alveolar gap (AG) prior to lip surgery. There are few studies comparing these 2 devices. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of active and passive PSO devices on facial growth in a single surgeon's cohort of patients with CL/P over a 10-year period.
Methods
A retrospective review of all patients with CL/P in a single surgeon's practice from 2002 to 2018 was performed. Preoperative measurements of AG size were done using electronic calipers on patient molds. Patient radiographs were taken at 5 and 10 years of age and cephalometric landmarks were plotted using specialized software. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means for maxillary, mandibular, vertical, and dento-alveolar growth parameters.
Results
Twenty patients with an active device and 23 patients with a passive device were included. No differences were observed in the basic demographic information between the two groups. At the time of lip repair, patients with a passive device had significantly larger horizontal AGs (P < .01), but by the time of palate repair, there was no difference between the two groups (P = .94). There was no significant difference in any growth measurements between the active and passive device groups at 5 and 10 years.
Conclusions
Despite closing the AG more quickly, patients treated with an active device have no significant difference in facial growth at 10 years compared to patients treated with a passive device.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1055-6656</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-1569</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/10556656221106891</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35698743</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Orthopedic apparatus ; Orthopedics ; Patients ; Surgeons</subject><ispartof>The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal, 2023-11, Vol.60 (11), p.1359-1365</ispartof><rights>2022, American Cleft Palate Craniofacial Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-e9b3f4732e073b2d250f5db270b8955f15665fa15476ca63d439c7049bb335913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-e9b3f4732e073b2d250f5db270b8955f15665fa15476ca63d439c7049bb335913</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9069-5683</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10556656221106891$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10556656221106891$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,21800,27905,27906,43602,43603</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35698743$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Garland, Katie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coyle, Michelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foley, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matic, Damir</creatorcontrib><title>Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices</title><title>The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal</title><addtitle>The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal</addtitle><description>Background
Pre-surgical orthopedic (PSO) devices can be used in the management of patient with cleft lip/palate (CL/P) to narrow the alveolar gap (AG) prior to lip surgery. There are few studies comparing these 2 devices. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of active and passive PSO devices on facial growth in a single surgeon's cohort of patients with CL/P over a 10-year period.
Methods
A retrospective review of all patients with CL/P in a single surgeon's practice from 2002 to 2018 was performed. Preoperative measurements of AG size were done using electronic calipers on patient molds. Patient radiographs were taken at 5 and 10 years of age and cephalometric landmarks were plotted using specialized software. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means for maxillary, mandibular, vertical, and dento-alveolar growth parameters.
Results
Twenty patients with an active device and 23 patients with a passive device were included. No differences were observed in the basic demographic information between the two groups. At the time of lip repair, patients with a passive device had significantly larger horizontal AGs (P < .01), but by the time of palate repair, there was no difference between the two groups (P = .94). There was no significant difference in any growth measurements between the active and passive device groups at 5 and 10 years.
Conclusions
Despite closing the AG more quickly, patients treated with an active device have no significant difference in facial growth at 10 years compared to patients treated with a passive device.</description><subject>Orthopedic apparatus</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><issn>1055-6656</issn><issn>1545-1569</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc9O3DAQxq2qqNAtD9BLZamXXgL-E9vJEYVCkZBAaKuKU-Q4E9YoiYPtbNWH4J3xarcggTh5NPOb-azvQ-grJUeUKnVMiRBSCskYpUQWJf2ADqjIRUaFLD-mOs2zDbCPPodwTwgTlBWf0D5P80Ll_AA9LmHMbkF7XMG00r0bIHprcOWGSXsb3Ihdh691tDDGgP_YuMJVD11MvV5HwH9XDt-AAbuGFi896DgkcguemJja2PkEh7Aprz1kYfZ31ugeX_m4chO0Se4U1tZA-IL2Ot0HONy9C_T77Oey-pVdXp1fVCeXmeGyiBmUDe9yxRkQxRvWMkE60TZMkaYohejoxpVOJyuUNFryNuelUSQvm4ZzUVK-QD-2dyfvHmYIsR5sMND3egQ3h5pJJZO1pMwT-v0Veu9mP6bf1axQjLIkWCSKbinjXQgeunrydtD-X01JvcmqfpNV2vm2uzw3A7TPG__DScDRFgj6Dl5k37_4BInqm4Q</recordid><startdate>20231101</startdate><enddate>20231101</enddate><creator>Garland, Katie</creator><creator>Coyle, Michelle</creator><creator>Foley, Tim</creator><creator>Matic, Damir</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9069-5683</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231101</creationdate><title>Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices</title><author>Garland, Katie ; Coyle, Michelle ; Foley, Tim ; Matic, Damir</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-e9b3f4732e073b2d250f5db270b8955f15665fa15476ca63d439c7049bb335913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Orthopedic apparatus</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Garland, Katie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coyle, Michelle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foley, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matic, Damir</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Garland, Katie</au><au>Coyle, Michelle</au><au>Foley, Tim</au><au>Matic, Damir</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices</atitle><jtitle>The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal</jtitle><addtitle>The Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal</addtitle><date>2023-11-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1359</spage><epage>1365</epage><pages>1359-1365</pages><issn>1055-6656</issn><eissn>1545-1569</eissn><abstract>Background
Pre-surgical orthopedic (PSO) devices can be used in the management of patient with cleft lip/palate (CL/P) to narrow the alveolar gap (AG) prior to lip surgery. There are few studies comparing these 2 devices. The objective of this work was to compare the effects of active and passive PSO devices on facial growth in a single surgeon's cohort of patients with CL/P over a 10-year period.
Methods
A retrospective review of all patients with CL/P in a single surgeon's practice from 2002 to 2018 was performed. Preoperative measurements of AG size were done using electronic calipers on patient molds. Patient radiographs were taken at 5 and 10 years of age and cephalometric landmarks were plotted using specialized software. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means for maxillary, mandibular, vertical, and dento-alveolar growth parameters.
Results
Twenty patients with an active device and 23 patients with a passive device were included. No differences were observed in the basic demographic information between the two groups. At the time of lip repair, patients with a passive device had significantly larger horizontal AGs (P < .01), but by the time of palate repair, there was no difference between the two groups (P = .94). There was no significant difference in any growth measurements between the active and passive device groups at 5 and 10 years.
Conclusions
Despite closing the AG more quickly, patients treated with an active device have no significant difference in facial growth at 10 years compared to patients treated with a passive device.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>35698743</pmid><doi>10.1177/10556656221106891</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9069-5683</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1055-6656 |
ispartof | The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal, 2023-11, Vol.60 (11), p.1359-1365 |
issn | 1055-6656 1545-1569 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2676556094 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List |
subjects | Orthopedic apparatus Orthopedics Patients Surgeons |
title | Ten-Year Cephalometric Comparison of Patients With Cleft Palate who Received Treatment With Active or Passive Pre-surgical Orthopedic Devices |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T05%3A35%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ten-Year%20Cephalometric%20Comparison%20of%20Patients%20With%20Cleft%20Palate%20who%20Received%20Treatment%20With%20Active%20or%20Passive%20Pre-surgical%20Orthopedic%20Devices&rft.jtitle=The%20Cleft%20palate-craniofacial%20journal&rft.au=Garland,%20Katie&rft.date=2023-11-01&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1359&rft.epage=1365&rft.pages=1359-1365&rft.issn=1055-6656&rft.eissn=1545-1569&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/10556656221106891&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2872129558%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2872129558&rft_id=info:pmid/35698743&rft_sage_id=10.1177_10556656221106891&rfr_iscdi=true |