European Journal of Plastic Surgery

, Volume 36, Issue 12, pp 739–748 | Cite as

Maxillo-mandibular relationship in untreated and surgically treated patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate: A cephalometric evaluation

  • Rohit Khanna
  • Tripti Tikku
  • R. K. Mishra
  • R. P. Maurya
  • Sneh Lata Verma
  • Kamna Srivastava
  • Sumit Anand
Original Paper



Cleft lip and palate is the most frequently encountered birth defect resulting from an incomplete union of the lateral nasal process and maxillary process during development. A cephalometric assessment was carried out to compare the maxillo-mandibular relationship in untreated and surgically treated patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCCLP).


This retrospective study included lateral and frontal cephalograms of 100 non-syndromic UCCLP patients of Indian origin within an age range of 12–20 years, divided in to two groups. Group I consisted of 50 untreated UCCLP patients. Group II consisted of 50 UCCLP patients who had undergone surgical intervention for cleft lip and palate repair before puberty.


Maxilla in surgically treated patients was found to be significantly shorter in the anteroposterior and vertical direction along with retroposition and clockwise rotation with respect to the cranial base. The mandible was found shorter in length and posteriorly positioned with respect to the cranial base along with downward and backward rotation in group II patients. Class III skeletal pattern was observed in group II patients but was not as severe as anticipated though the maxilla is short and retropositioned because of some compensation being done by the shorter mandibular length and clockwise rotation of the mandible. Measurements on frontal cephalogram showed decreased maxillary width, nasal height and nasal width in surgically treated cases.


The findings of this study suggested that surgical intervention at early age has significant restraining effect on maxillary growth that results in class III skeletal relationship/tendency.

Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study.


Unilateral complete cleft lip and palate Non-syndromic Maxillo-mandibular relationship 


Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    Vanderas AP (1987) Incidence of cleft lip, cleft palate, and cleft lip and palate among races: a review. Cleft Palate J 24:216–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ankola AV, Nagesh L, Hedge P, Karibasappa GN (2005) Primary dentition status and treatment needs of children with cleft lip and/or palate. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 23:80–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ross RB (1987) Treatment variables affecting facial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 24(1):5–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shetye PR (2004) Facial growth of adults with unoperated clefts. Clin Plast Surg 31:361–371PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Malek R, Martinez H, Mousset MR, Trichet C (1990) Multidisciplinary management of cleft lip and palate in Paris, France. In: Bardach J, Morris HL (eds) Multidisciplinary management of cleft lip and palate. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 1e10Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Estrem T, Broen P (1989) Early speech production of children with cleft palate. J Speech Hear Dis 32:12e23Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    O'Gara MM, Logemann JA, Rademaker AW (1994) Phonetic features by babies with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 31:446e51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nollet PJ, Katsaros C, Huyskens RW, Borstlap WA, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM (2008) Cephalometric evaluation of long-term craniofacial development in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients treated with delayed hard palate closure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 37(2):123–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rohrich RJ, Rowsell AR, Johns DF, Drury MA, Grieg G, Watson DJ, Godfrey AM, Poole MD (1996) Timing of hard palatal closure: a critical long-term analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 98:236–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holland S, Gabbay J, Justin H, O'hara C, Hurwitz D, Matthew F et al (2007) Delayed closure of the hard palate leads to speech problems and deleterious maxillary growth. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:1302–1310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Savaci N, Hosnuter M, Tosun Z, Demir A (2005) Maxillofacial morphology in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate treated by one-stage simultaneous repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 115:1509–1517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liao Y-F, Mars M (2005) Long-term effects of palate repair on craniofacial morphology in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 42(6):594–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liao YF, Mars M (2006) Hard palate repair timing and facial growth in cleft lip and palate: a systematic review. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 43(5):563–570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smahel Z, Müllerová Z (1994) Facial growth and development in unilateral cleft lip and palate during the period of puberty: comparison of the development after periosteoplasty and after primary bone grafting. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 31(2):106–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hermann NV, Darvann TA, Jensen BL, Dahl E, Bolund S, Kreiborg S (2004) Early craniofacial morphology and growth in children with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofacial J 41(4):424–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Doğan S, Onçağ G, Akin Y (2006) Craniofacial development in children with unilateral cleft lip and palate British. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 44(1):28–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bishara SE, Iversen WW (1974) Cephalometric comparisons on the cranial base and face in individuals with isolated clefts of the palate. Cleft Palate J 11:162–175PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seo YJ, Park JW, Kim YH, Baek SH (2011) Initial growth pattern of children with cleft before alveolar bone graft stage according to cleft type. Angle Orthod 81(6):1103–1110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu X, Zheng Q, Lu D, Huang N, Li J, Li S, Wang Y, Shi B (2012) Timing of palate repair affecting growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 40(8):e358–e362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dahl E (1979) Transverse maxillary growth in combined cleft lip and palate. A longitudinal roentgencephalometric study by the implant method. Cleft Palate J 16(1):34–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dahl E, Kreiborg S, Jensen BL, Fogh-Andersen P (1982) Comparison of craniofacial morphology in infants with incomplete cleft lip and infants with isolated cleft palate. Cleft Palate J 19(4):258–266PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Motohashi N, Kuroda T, Filho LC, Freitas JDS (1994) P-A cephalometric analysis of nonoperated adult cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 31(3):193–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Molsted K, Dahl E (1990) Asymmetry of the maxilla in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 2(2):184–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rohit Khanna
    • 1
  • Tripti Tikku
    • 1
  • R. K. Mishra
    • 2
  • R. P. Maurya
    • 1
  • Sneh Lata Verma
    • 1
  • Kamna Srivastava
    • 1
  • Sumit Anand
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of OrthodonticsBabu Banarasi Das College of Dental SciencesLucknowIndia
  2. 2.Burns and Trauma CentreSushrut Institute of Plastic SurgeryLucknowIndia

Personalised recommendations