The Soft Tissue Angular Analysis of Facial Profile in Unoperated Adult Patients with Unilateral Cleft Palate
- 29 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in facial profile development between unoperated adult cleft palate (UACP) patients and normal controls and to analyse the reasons for the differences.
Materials and Methods
A total of 50 individuals with a unilateral cleft palate and 20 normal controls were selected to undergo angular measurement of their facial profiles. Data with significant differences between the two groups were analysed.
Seven angle measurements of the facial profile showed that the mid-facial protrusion of the UACP patients had no significant differences from the control group (p > 0.05). But their angle of the medium face (N′–Trg–Sn) was significantly lower than the non-cleft controls (p < 0.05), suggesting a worse vertical development of the middle face. A significantly larger nasal tip angle (Cm–Sn/N′–Prn) for UACP patients suggested they had a rounder and blunter nasal tip (p < 0.05). The soft tissue facial angle and chin–lip angle of UACP patients had significant differences from non-cleft controls (p < 0.05), but the head position angle (Sn–Sm–THP) had no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05), which suggested a steep mandibular plane for UACP patients but without severe retraction of the chin.
The development of facial protrusions in UACP patients is similar to that in normal adults, but the vertical development in the middle face is insufficient. Such hypoplasia may be related to the intrinsic deficiency of the maxilla. There is a tendency for flat nasal growth and insufficient development of the chin in UACP patients.
Level of Evidence IV
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
KeywordsUnoperated adult cleft palate patient Facial profile of soft tissue Angular analysis Mid-face development
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
We declare that we have no conflict of interest.
The study protocol was approved by the Internal Review Board of the Department of the College of Stomatology at Guangxi Medical University.
All patients signed informed consent forms.
- 6.Schweckendiek W (1978) Primary veloplasty: long-term results without maxillary deformity. A twenty-five year report. Cleft Palate J 15(3):268–274Google Scholar
- 21.Shetye PR, Evans CA (2006) Midfacial morphology in adult unoperated complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Angle Orthod 76(5):810–817Google Scholar
- 25.Ross RB (1987) Treatment variables affecting facial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 24(1):75–77Google Scholar
- 27.Isiekwe MC, Sowemimo GOA (1984) Cephalometric findings in a normal nigerian population sample and adult nigerians with unrepaired clefts. Cleft Palate J 21(4):323–328Google Scholar
- 28.Smahel Z, Polivková H, Skvarilová B et al (1992) Configuration of facial profile in adults with cleft lip with or without cleft palate. Acta Chir Plast 34(4):190–203Google Scholar