Advertisement

Outcome of gingivoperiosteoplasty for the treatment of alveolar clefts in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate

  • Yi-Chin Wang
    Affiliations
    Department of Craniofacial Orthodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Craniofacial Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 123, Dinghu Rd., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fusing St., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Yu-Fang Liao
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author at: Department of Craniofacial Orthodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 123, Dinghu Road, Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan. Tel.: +886 3 3196200x3500; fax: +886 3 3501997.
    Affiliations
    Department of Craniofacial Orthodontics, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Craniofacial Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 123, Dinghu Rd., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fusing St., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, No. 259 Wen-Hwa 1st Rd., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
  • Philip Kuo-Ting Chen
    Affiliations
    Craniofacial Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 123, Dinghu Rd., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    Craniofacial Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fusing St., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, No. 259 Wen-Hwa 1st Rd., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan

    Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fusing St., Gueishan Township, Taoyuan County 333, Taiwan
    Search for articles by this author
Published:October 16, 2012DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2012.09.012

      Abstract

      Gingivoperiosteoplasty (GPP) has produced inconsistent outcomes. The purpose of this prospective study was to investigate the effects of GPP on the production of bone and maxillary growth. We analysed postoperative cone-beam computed tomographic (CT) scans and intraoral dental photographs of 25 children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) who were treated with GPP at the same time as their primary repair of the lip. Residual cleft defects and unsupported root ratios of central incisors adjacent to clefts were measured from scans. Dental arch relations were assessed from photographs using the Goslon (Great Ormond Street London and Oslo) yardstick. Eighteen children did not require secondary alveolar bone grafts. Residual cleft defects varied by site (20.4 mm3, 38.6 mm3, 88.2 mm3, and 135.2 mm3 for buccal coronal, palatal coronal, buccal apical, and palatal apical defects, respectively; p < 0.001). Unsupported root ratios did not differ significantly between coronal and apical central incisors adjacent to clefts. The mean (SD) Goslon score was 4.52 (0.51). Most participants (n = 18) who had a GPP did not need secondary alveolar bone grafting. GPP resulted in least bone on the palatal apical portion of the previous alveolar cleft and relatively good periodontal bony support of central incisors adjacent to the cleft. We no longer use GPP because of our concerns about maxillary growth.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Skoog T.
        The use of periosteal flaps in the repair of clefts of the primary palate.
        Cleft Palate J. 1965; 2: 332-339
        • Millard D.R.
        • Latham R.
        • Huifen X.
        • Spiro S.
        • Morovic C.
        Cleft lip and palate treated by presurgical orthopedics, gingivoperiosteoplasty, and lip adhesion (POPLA) compared with previous lip adhesion method: a preliminary study of serial dental casts.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999; 103: 1630-1644
        • Latham R.A.
        Orthopedic advancement of the cleft maxillary segment: a preliminary report.
        Cleft Palate J. 1980; 17: 227-233
        • Santiago P.E.
        • Grayson B.H.
        • Cutting C.B.
        • Gianoutsos M.P.
        • Brecht L.E.
        • Kwon S.M.
        Reduced need for alveolar bone grafting by presurgical orthopedics and primary gingivoperiosteoplasty.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998; 35: 77-80
        • Sato Y.
        • Grayson B.H.
        • Garfinkle J.S.
        • Barillas I.
        • Maki K.
        • Cutting C.B.
        Success rate of gingivoperiosteoplasty with and without secondary bone grafts compared with secondary alveolar bone grafts alone.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 121: 1356-1367
        • Long R.E.
        • Spangler B.E.
        • Yow M.
        Cleft width and secondary alveolar bone graft success.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1995; 32: 420-427
        • Matic D.B.
        • Power S.M.
        Evaluating the success of gingivoperiosteoplasty versus secondary bone grafting in patients with unilateral clefts.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 121: 1343-1353
        • Bergland O.
        • Semb G.
        • Abyholm F.E.
        Elimination of the residual alveolar cleft by secondary bone grafting and subsequent orthodontic treatment.
        Cleft Palate J. 1986; 23: 175-205
        • Witherow H.
        • Cox S.
        • Jones E.
        • Carr R.
        • Waterhouse N.
        A new scale to assess radiographic success of secondary alveolar bone grafts.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002; 39: 255-260
        • Grayson B.H.
        • Santiago P.E.
        • Brecht L.E.
        • Cutting C.B.
        Presurgical nasoalveolar molding in infants with cleft lip and palate.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999; 36: 486-498
        • Oberoi S.
        • Chigurupati R.
        • Gill P.
        • Hoffman W.Y.
        • Vargervik K.
        Volumetric assessment of secondary alveolar bone grafting using cone beam computed tomography.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009; 46: 503-511
        • Liao Y.F.
        • Huang C.S.
        • Lin I.F.
        Intraoral photographs for rating dental arch relationships in unilateral cleft lip and palate.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009; 46: 415-419
        • Mars M.
        • Plint D.A.
        • Houston W.J.
        • Bergland O.
        • Semb G.
        The Goslon yardstick: a new system of assessing dental arch relationships in children with unilateral clefts of the lip and palate.
        Cleft Palate J. 1987; 24: 314-322
        • Altman D.G.
        Practical statistics for medical research.
        Chapman and Hall, London1991 (pp. 404–408)
        • Tsai T.P.
        • Huang C.S.
        • Huang C.C.
        • See L.C.
        Distribution patterns of primary and permanent dentition in children with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998; 35: 154-160
        • Wood R.J.
        • Grayson B.H.
        • Cutting C.B.
        Gingivoperiosteoplasty and midfacial growth.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1997; 34: 17-20
        • Lee C.T.
        • Grayson B.H.
        • Cutting C.B.
        • Brecht L.E.
        • Lin W.Y.
        Prepubertal midface growth in unilateral cleft lip and palate following alveolar molding and gingivoperiosteoplasty.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2004; 41: 375-380
        • Henkel K.O.
        • Gundlach K.K.
        Analysis of primary gingivoperiosteoplasty in alveolar cleft repair. Part I: Facial growth.
        J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1997; 25: 266-269
        • Berkowitz S.
        • Mejia M.
        • Bystrik A.
        A comparison of the effects of the Latham–Millard procedure with those of a conservative treatment approach for dental occlusion and facial aesthetics in unilateral and bilateral complete cleft lip and palate: Part I. Dental occlusion.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004; 113: 1-18
        • Matic D.B.
        • Power S.M.
        The effects of gingivoperiosteoplasty following alveolar molding with a pin-retained Latham appliance versus secondary bone grafting on midfacial growth in patients with unilateral clefts.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 122: 863-873
        • Hsieh C.H.
        • Ko E.W.
        • Chen P.K.
        • Huang C.S.
        The effect of gingivoperiosteoplasty on facial growth in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate.
        Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010; 47: 439-446
        • Hsieh Y.J.
        • Liao Y.F.
        • Shetty A
        Predictors of poor dental arch relationship in young children with unilateral cleft lip and palate.
        Clin Oral Investig. 2012; 16: 1261-1266
        • Liao Y.F.
        • Lin I.F.
        Dental arch relationships after two-flap palatoplasty in Taiwanese patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 38: 1133-1136
        • Meazzini M.C.
        • Capasso E.
        • Morabito A.
        • Garattini G.
        • Brusati R.
        Comparison of growth results in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate after early secondary gingivoalveoloplasty and secondary bone grafting: 20 years follow up.
        Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2008; 42: 290-295
        • Meazzini M.C.
        • Tortora C.
        • Morabito A.
        • GarattiniG
        • Brusati R.
        Alveolar bone formation in patients with unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate after secondary gingivoalveoloplasty: long term results.
        Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007; 119: 1527-1537