-
Something wrong with this record ?
Regional facial asymmetries in unilateral orofacial clefts
MA. Kuijpers, DJ. Desmedt, RM. Nada, SJ. Bergé, PS. Fudalej, TJ. Maal,
Language English Country England, Great Britain
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article
NLK
Free Medical Journals
from 1996 to 1 year ago
Open Access Digital Library
from 1996-01-01
PubMed
25700990
DOI
10.1093/ejo/cju104
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Anatomic Landmarks pathology MeSH
- Facial Asymmetry classification MeSH
- Chin pathology MeSH
- Child MeSH
- Photogrammetry methods MeSH
- Cephalometry methods MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Nose pathology MeSH
- Face pathology MeSH
- Alveolar Process abnormalities MeSH
- Lip pathology MeSH
- Cleft Palate classification MeSH
- Cleft Lip classification MeSH
- Cheek pathology MeSH
- Imaging, Three-Dimensional methods MeSH
- Check Tag
- Child MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
OBJECTIVES: Assess facial asymmetry in subjects with unilateral cleft lip (UCL), unilateral cleft lip and alveolus (UCLA), and unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (UCLP), and to evaluate which area of the face is most asymmetrical. METHODS: Standardized three-dimensional facial images of 58 patients (9 UCL, 21 UCLA, and 28 UCLP; age range: 8.6-12.3 years) and 121 controls (age range 9-12 years) were mirrored and distance maps were created. Absolute mean asymmetry values were calculated for the whole face, cheek, nose, lips, and chin. One-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis, and t-test were used to assess the differences between clefts and controls for the whole face and separate areas. RESULTS: Clefts and controls differ significantly for the whole face as well as in all areas. Asymmetry is distributed differently over the face for all groups. In UCLA, the nose was significantly more asymmetric compared with chin and cheek (P = 0.038 and 0.024, respectively). For UCL, significant differences in asymmetry between nose and chin and chin and cheek were present (P = 0.038 and 0.046, respectively). In the control group, the chin was the most asymmetric area compared to lip and nose (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively) followed by the nose (P = 0.004). In UCLP, the nose, followed by the lips, was the most asymmetric area compared to chin, cheek (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively). LIMITATIONS: Despite division into regional areas, the method may still exclude or underrate smaller local areas in the face, which are better visualized in a facial colour coded distance map than quantified by distance numbers. The UCL subsample is small. CONCLUSION: Each type of cleft has its own distinct asymmetry pattern. Children with unilateral clefts show more facial asymmetry than children without clefts.
*Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology
*Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology Cleft Palate Craniofacial Unit and
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery Radboudumc Nijmegen The Netherlands
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc16020966
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20160727094624.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 160722s2015 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1093/ejo/cju104 $2 doi
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1093/ejo/cju104 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)25700990
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Kuijpers, Mette A $u *Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Cleft Palate Craniofacial Unit and orthodontics@dent.umcn.nl.
- 245 10
- $a Regional facial asymmetries in unilateral orofacial clefts / $c MA. Kuijpers, DJ. Desmedt, RM. Nada, SJ. Bergé, PS. Fudalej, TJ. Maal,
- 520 9_
- $a OBJECTIVES: Assess facial asymmetry in subjects with unilateral cleft lip (UCL), unilateral cleft lip and alveolus (UCLA), and unilateral cleft lip, alveolus, and palate (UCLP), and to evaluate which area of the face is most asymmetrical. METHODS: Standardized three-dimensional facial images of 58 patients (9 UCL, 21 UCLA, and 28 UCLP; age range: 8.6-12.3 years) and 121 controls (age range 9-12 years) were mirrored and distance maps were created. Absolute mean asymmetry values were calculated for the whole face, cheek, nose, lips, and chin. One-way analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis, and t-test were used to assess the differences between clefts and controls for the whole face and separate areas. RESULTS: Clefts and controls differ significantly for the whole face as well as in all areas. Asymmetry is distributed differently over the face for all groups. In UCLA, the nose was significantly more asymmetric compared with chin and cheek (P = 0.038 and 0.024, respectively). For UCL, significant differences in asymmetry between nose and chin and chin and cheek were present (P = 0.038 and 0.046, respectively). In the control group, the chin was the most asymmetric area compared to lip and nose (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively) followed by the nose (P = 0.004). In UCLP, the nose, followed by the lips, was the most asymmetric area compared to chin, cheek (P < 0.001 and P = 0.016, respectively). LIMITATIONS: Despite division into regional areas, the method may still exclude or underrate smaller local areas in the face, which are better visualized in a facial colour coded distance map than quantified by distance numbers. The UCL subsample is small. CONCLUSION: Each type of cleft has its own distinct asymmetry pattern. Children with unilateral clefts show more facial asymmetry than children without clefts.
- 650 _2
- $a processus alveolaris $x abnormality $7 D000539
- 650 _2
- $a anatomická značka $x patologie $7 D059925
- 650 _2
- $a kefalometrie $x metody $7 D002508
- 650 _2
- $a tvář $x patologie $7 D002610
- 650 _2
- $a dítě $7 D002648
- 650 _2
- $a brada $x patologie $7 D002680
- 650 _2
- $a rozštěp rtu $x klasifikace $7 D002971
- 650 _2
- $a rozštěp patra $x klasifikace $7 D002972
- 650 _2
- $a obličej $x patologie $7 D005145
- 650 _2
- $a asymetrie obličeje $x klasifikace $7 D005146
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a zobrazování trojrozměrné $x metody $7 D021621
- 650 _2
- $a ret $x patologie $7 D008046
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a nos $x patologie $7 D009666
- 650 _2
- $a fotogrammetrie $x metody $7 D010780
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Desmedt, Dries J $u *Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology.
- 700 1_
- $a Nada, Rania M $u *Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology.
- 700 1_
- $a Bergé, Stefaan J $u Cleft Palate Craniofacial Unit and Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- 700 1_
- $a Fudalej, Piotr S $u Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University of Bern, Switzerland, Department of Orthodontics, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Maal, Thomas J $u Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00001634 $t European journal of orthodontics $x 1460-2210 $g Roč. 37, č. 6 (2015), s. 636-42
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25700990 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20160722 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20160727094845 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1155636 $s 945494
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2015 $b 37 $c 6 $d 636-42 $e 20150219 $i 1460-2210 $m European journal of orthodontics $n Eur J Orthod $x MED00001634
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20160722