Cleft lip Sidedness and the Association with Additional Congenital Malformations.

IF 1.1 4区医学 Q2 Dentistry

Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal Pub Date : 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1177/10556656241261918

Matthew Fell, Kate J Fitzsimons, Mark J Hamilton, Jibby Medina, Sophie Butterworth, Min Hae Park, Jan Van der Meulen, Sarah Lewis, David Chong, Craig Jh Russell

{"title":"Cleft lip Sidedness and the Association with Additional Congenital Malformations.","authors":"Matthew Fell, Kate J Fitzsimons, Mark J Hamilton, Jibby Medina, Sophie Butterworth, Min Hae Park, Jan Van der Meulen, Sarah Lewis, David Chong, Craig Jh Russell","doi":"10.1177/10556656241261918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To investigate the association between the sidedness of orofacial clefts and additional congenital malformations.Design: Linkage of a national registry of cleft births to national administrative data of hospital admissions.Setting: National Health Service, England.Participants: 2007 children born with cleft lip ± alveolus (CL ± A) and 2724 with cleft lip and palate (CLP) born between 2000 and 2012.Main outcome measure: The proportion of children with ICD-10 codes for additional congenital malformations by the sidedness (left, right or bilateral) of orofacial clefts.Results: For CL ± A phenotypes, there was no evidence for a difference in the prevalence of additional anomalies between left (22%, reference), right (22%, aOR 1.02, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.28; P = .90) and bilateral clefts (23%, aOR 1.09, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.57; P = .66). For CLP phenotypes, there was evidence of a lower prevalence of additional malformations in left (23%, reference) compared to right (32%, aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.91; P < .001) and bilateral clefts (33%, aOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.99; P < .001).Conclusions: The prevalence of additional congenital malformations was similar across sidedness subtypes with CL ± A phenotypes but was different for sidedness subtypes within CLP cases. These data support the hypothesis that CL ± A has a different underlying aetiology from CLP and that within the CLP phenotype, right sided CLP may lie closer in aetiology to bilateral CLP than it does to left sided CLP.","PeriodicalId":49220,"journal":{"name":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656241261918","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the association between the sidedness of orofacial clefts and additional congenital malformations.

Design: Linkage of a national registry of cleft births to national administrative data of hospital admissions.

Setting: National Health Service, England.

Participants: 2007 children born with cleft lip ± alveolus (CL ± A) and 2724 with cleft lip and palate (CLP) born between 2000 and 2012.

Main outcome measure: The proportion of children with ICD-10 codes for additional congenital malformations by the sidedness (left, right or bilateral) of orofacial clefts.

Results: For CL ± A phenotypes, there was no evidence for a difference in the prevalence of additional anomalies between left (22%, reference), right (22%, aOR 1.02, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.28; P = .90) and bilateral clefts (23%, aOR 1.09, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.57; P = .66). For CLP phenotypes, there was evidence of a lower prevalence of additional malformations in left (23%, reference) compared to right (32%, aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.91; P < .001) and bilateral clefts (33%, aOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.99; P < .001).

Conclusions: The prevalence of additional congenital malformations was similar across sidedness subtypes with CL ± A phenotypes but was different for sidedness subtypes within CLP cases. These data support the hypothesis that CL ± A has a different underlying aetiology from CLP and that within the CLP phenotype, right sided CLP may lie closer in aetiology to bilateral CLP than it does to left sided CLP.

查看原文本刊更多论文

唇侧裂与其他先天性畸形的关系

目的调查口面裂的偏侧性与其他先天性畸形之间的关联：设计：将全国唇裂出生登记与全国入院管理数据进行关联：主要结果测量指标：根据面裂的偏侧（左侧、右侧或双侧），患有ICD-10编码额外先天畸形的儿童比例：对于 CL ± A 表型，没有证据表明左侧（22%，参考值）、右侧（22%，aOR 1.02，95% CI 0.80 至 1.28；P = .90）和双侧（23%，aOR 1.09，95% CI 0.75 至 1.57；P = .66）额外畸形的发生率存在差异。就 CLP 表型而言，有证据表明左侧（23%，参考值）额外畸形的发生率低于右侧（32%，aOR 1.54，95% CI 1.25 至 1.91；P P 结论：不同侧位亚型的CL±A表型的额外先天畸形发生率相似，但CLP病例中不同侧位亚型的额外先天畸形发生率不同。这些数据支持以下假设：CL±A 的潜在病因与 CLP 不同，在 CLP 表型中，右侧 CLP 的病因可能更接近于双侧 CLP，而不是左侧 CLP。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-SURGERY

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

36.40%

发文量

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (CPCJ) is the premiere peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to current research on etiology, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in all areas pertaining to craniofacial anomalies. CPCJ reports on basic science and clinical research aimed at better elucidating the pathogenesis, pathology, and optimal methods of treatment of cleft and craniofacial anomalies. The journal strives to foster communication and cooperation among professionals from all specialties.

文献相关原料

公司名称	产品信息	采购帮参考价格