Comparison of treatment outcome and stability between distraction osteogenesis and LeFort I osteotomy in cleft patients with maxillary hypoplasia

The purpose of this study was to compare treatment outcome and relapse between maxillary advancement surgery with LeFort I osteotomy and maxillary distraction osteogenesis in patients with cleft lip and palate with maxillary hypoplasia. The sample consisted of a maxillary advancement surgery with LeFort I osteotomy group (group 1, N= 14, mean age, 21.7 years) and a maxillary distraction osteogenesis group (group 2, N = 11, mean age, 16.3 years). Lateral cephalograms were taken and traced at presurgery (T0), postsurgery (T1), and postretention (T2). Nine hard and four soft tissue cephalometric variables were measured. Differences in measurements at each stage, treatment outcome (T1-T0), and relapse (T2-T1) were compared between groups with independent t test. Because the amount of surgical movement could affect the amount of relapse, a difference in relapse between two groups was compared by analysis of covariance with the amount of surgical movement as a covariant. Although the amounts of forward movements of A point (P < 0.01), upper incisor (P < 0.001), and upper lip (P < 0.001) during T1-T0 were greater in group 2, there were no significant differences in the amounts of relapse (T2-T1) between the two groups. During T1-T0, counterclockwise rotation of the palatal plane was observed in group 2 as a result of downward movement of posterior nasal spine (PNS) at T1, whereas group 1 had clockwise rotation of palatal plane at T1 because of downward movement of anterior nasal spine (ANS). The amounts of relapse (T2-T1) in vertical movements of PNS and upper incisor were significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05). The amount of required maxillary advancement, vector control of palatal plane, and vertical position of upper incisor would be important factors when planning a surgical treatment in patients with cleft lip and palate with midface hypoplasia.