Ines Willershausen, Nils Krautkremer, Armin Ströbel, Tariq Abu-Tair, Friedrich Paulsen, Karin Strobel, Markus Kopp, Matthias Stefan May, Michael Uder, Franziska Krautkremer, Lina Gölz
{"title":"Evaluation of hard palate and cleft morphology in neonates with Pierre Robin Sequence and Cleft Palate Only","authors":"Ines Willershausen, Nils Krautkremer, Armin Ströbel, Tariq Abu-Tair, Friedrich Paulsen, Karin Strobel, Markus Kopp, Matthias Stefan May, Michael Uder, Franziska Krautkremer, Lina Gölz","doi":"10.1111/ocr.12818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to establish a fully digital measurement protocol for standardizing the description of hard palate and cleft morphology in neonates with an isolated cleft palate (CPO) and Pierre Robin sequence (PRS).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 20 digitized plaster models of neonates with CPO and 20 digitized plaster models of neonates with PRS were retrospectively investigated. For the control group, the hard palate was segmented from 21 pre-existing 1.5 T MRI datasets of neonates and exported as an STL file. The digital models were marked with predefined reference points by three raters. Distance, angular, and area measurements were performed using Blender and MeshLab.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Neonates with CPO (20.20 ± 2.33 mm) and PRS (21.41 ± 1.81 mm) had a significantly shorter hard palate than the control group (23.44 ± 2.24 mm) (CPO vs. control: <i>P</i> < .001; PRS vs. control: <i>P</i> = .014). Notably, neonates with PRS (33.05 ± 1.95 mm) demonstrated a significantly wider intertuberosity distance than those with CPO (30.52 ± 2.28 mm) (<i>P</i> = .012). Furthermore, there were also significant differences measured between the cleft and control groups (25.22 ± 2.50 mm) (<i>P</i> < .001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The data from this study demonstrate the feasibility of using MRI datasets to generate digital models of the hard palate. The presence of a cleft palate leads to pronounced adaptations of the total palatal surface area, dorsal width, and length of the hard palate. Mandibular retrognathia and altered tongue position in PRS, as opposed to CPO, might further impact palatal morphology and intertuberosity distance.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":19652,"journal":{"name":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","volume":"27 S2","pages":"155-163"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ocr.12818","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ocr.12818","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
This study aimed to establish a fully digital measurement protocol for standardizing the description of hard palate and cleft morphology in neonates with an isolated cleft palate (CPO) and Pierre Robin sequence (PRS).
Materials and Methods
A total of 20 digitized plaster models of neonates with CPO and 20 digitized plaster models of neonates with PRS were retrospectively investigated. For the control group, the hard palate was segmented from 21 pre-existing 1.5 T MRI datasets of neonates and exported as an STL file. The digital models were marked with predefined reference points by three raters. Distance, angular, and area measurements were performed using Blender and MeshLab.
Results
Neonates with CPO (20.20 ± 2.33 mm) and PRS (21.41 ± 1.81 mm) had a significantly shorter hard palate than the control group (23.44 ± 2.24 mm) (CPO vs. control: P < .001; PRS vs. control: P = .014). Notably, neonates with PRS (33.05 ± 1.95 mm) demonstrated a significantly wider intertuberosity distance than those with CPO (30.52 ± 2.28 mm) (P = .012). Furthermore, there were also significant differences measured between the cleft and control groups (25.22 ± 2.50 mm) (P < .001).
Conclusions
The data from this study demonstrate the feasibility of using MRI datasets to generate digital models of the hard palate. The presence of a cleft palate leads to pronounced adaptations of the total palatal surface area, dorsal width, and length of the hard palate. Mandibular retrognathia and altered tongue position in PRS, as opposed to CPO, might further impact palatal morphology and intertuberosity distance.
期刊介绍:
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research - Genes, Growth and Development is published to serve its readers as an international forum for the presentation and critical discussion of issues pertinent to the advancement of the specialty of orthodontics and the evidence-based knowledge of craniofacial growth and development. This forum is based on scientifically supported information, but also includes minority and conflicting opinions.
The objective of the journal is to facilitate effective communication between the research community and practicing clinicians. Original papers of high scientific quality that report the findings of clinical trials, clinical epidemiology, and novel therapeutic or diagnostic approaches are appropriate submissions. Similarly, we welcome papers in genetics, developmental biology, syndromology, surgery, speech and hearing, and other biomedical disciplines related to clinical orthodontics and normal and abnormal craniofacial growth and development. In addition to original and basic research, the journal publishes concise reviews, case reports of substantial value, invited essays, letters, and announcements.
The journal is published quarterly. The review of submitted papers will be coordinated by the editor and members of the editorial board. It is policy to review manuscripts within 3 to 4 weeks of receipt and to publish within 3 to 6 months of acceptance.