ERKEN VE GEÇ DAMAK YARIĞI ONARIMLARININ MAKSİLLA GELİŞİMİ ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİLERİNİN SEFALOMETRİK ANALİZ YÖNTEMİ İLE KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Yıl 2007, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 3, 155 - 164, 01.12.2007

Ali Emre Aksu Figen Özgür

Öz

Damak yarığı onarımının zamanı ile ilgili tartışmalar, onarımın daha iyi bir konuşma elde edecek kadar erken, maksilla gelişimini en az etkileyecek kadar geç dönemde yapılması üzerinde yoğunlaşmaktadır. Erken damak onarımının (12. aydan önce) konuşma ve işitme fonksiyonları üzerindeki olumlu etkisi düşünülerek, son 10 yıl içerisinde erken onarım yapılan bir grup oluşturuldu ve bu gruptan seçilen hastaların maksilla gelişimleri 12-24. aylar arasında damak onarımı yapılan hastalardaki gelişimle karşılaştırıldı. Olgular tek taraflı tam dudak yarığı + tam damak yarığı olan hastalar arasından seçildi. Erken onarım grubuna, onarımın 12 aydan önce, geç onarım grubuna, onarımın 12-24. aylar arasında gerçekleştirildiği 10'ar hasta dahil edildi. Hastaların 4-6 yaşlarında sefalometrik analiz yöntemi ile ortayüz gelişimleri değerlendirildi. Çalışma gruplarından elde edilen lateral ve frontal sefalometrik değerler, sınıf I dentoiskelet ilişkisine sahip 15 bireyden oluşan kontrol grubu değerleriyle de karşılaştırıldı. Sonuçların gruplar arasında maksilla gelişimi açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık olmadığını gösterdiği görüldü. Bununla birlikte, tüm yarık olgularında maksillanın daha geniş olmaya yatkın olduğu ve daha superior ve retruzif pozisyonda bulunduğu saptandı ve bu bulguların geç onarım grubunda daha belirgin olduğu görüldü. Çalışmanın sonuçları, erken damak yarığı onarımının maksilla gelişimi üzerindeki etkilerinin konvansiyonel dönemdeki onarımlardan farklı olmadığını ve erken onarımın bir tedavi alternatifi olarak kabul edilebileceğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Maksilla gelişimi, erken ve geç damak onarımları, sefalometrik analiz

CEPHALOMETRIC COMPARISON OF MAXILLARY GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN PATIENTS WITH EARLY VERSUS LATE CLEFT PALATE REPAIR

Öz

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of early versus late palatal repair on maxillofacial growth. Two groups (10 patients in each) were designed according to palatal repair time, having early and late palatal repairs before 12 months of age and between 12-24 months, respectively. At 4-6 years of age, maxillofacial growth was evaluated based on cephalometric evaluation of the midface. Lateral and frontal cephalograms were obtained for both repair groups and for a control group of 15 agematched children with class I dentoskeletal relationships. The study revealed no statistically significant growth differences between the groups. Although not statistically significant, in cleft palate cases the maxillae tended to be larger in width, more superiorly positioned in the vertical plane, and more retrusive, with the late repair group being more influenced. The results of this study show that the early palatal repair has similar effects on maxillary growth as compared with the outcomes of the late repairs and early repair might be considered as a treatment alternative as far as the timing of the operation is considered.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Maxillary growth, early versus late palatal repair, cephalometric analysis

Kaynakça

• Ross RB. Facial growth in cleft lip and palate. In J . G. McCarthy (Ed.) plastic Surgery. philadelphia: W. B. Saunders, 1990;2553-2580.
• Subtelny JD. A review of cleft palate growth studies reported in the past 10 years. plast Reconstr Surg 1962;30:56-67.
• Herfert O. Fundamental investigations into problems related to cleft palate surgery. Br J plast Surg 1958;11:97.
• Jolleys A. A review of the results of operations in cleft palates with reference to maxillary growth and speech functions. Br J plast Surg 1954;7:229-241.
• Shibasaki Y, Ross RB. Facial growth in children with isolated cleft palate. Cleft palate J 1969;6:290-302.
• Bardach J, Eisbach KJ. The influence of primary unilateral cleft lip repair on facial growth: part I. lip pressure. Cleft palate J 1977;14:88-97.
• Bardach J, Klausner EC, Eisbach KJ. The relationship between lip pressure and facial growth after cleft lip repair: An experimental study. Cleft palate J 1979;16:137-146.
• Bardach J, Roberts DM, Yale R, Rosewall D, Mooney M.The influence of simultaneous cleft lip and palate repair on facial growth in rabbits. Cleft palate J 1980;17:309-318.
• Bardach J, Mooney Mp, Giedrojc-Juraha Zl. A comperative study of facial growth following cleft lip repair with or without soft tissue undermining: An experimental study in rabbits. plast Reconstr Surg 1982;69:745-753.
• Bardach J, Mooney Mp. The relationship between lip pressure following lip repair and craniofacial growth: An experimental study in beagles. plast Reconstr Surg 1984;73:544-555.
• Bardach J, Bakowska J, McDermott-Murray J,Mooney Mp, Dusdieker lB. lip pressure changes following lip repair in infants with unilateral clefts of the lip and palate. plast Reconstr Surg 1984;74:476-481.
• Bardach J. The influence of cleft lip repair on facial growth. Cleft palate J 1990;27:76-78.
• Ricketts RM, Bench RW, Gugino C, Hilgers J, Schulhof RJ. The use of superimposition areas toestablish treatment design. In Ricketts RM, Bench RW, Gugino C, Hilgers J, Schulhof RJ (eds.) Bioprogressive Therapy. USA: Rocky Mountain Co., 55-69: 1980.
• Ricketts RM. progressive Cephalometrics. Scotssdale, Arizona: AmericanInstitute for Bioprogressive Education, 11-40:1996.
• McNamara JA Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod 1984;86:449-469.
• McNamara JA Jr, Brudon Wl. The cephalometric evaluation of the orthodontic patient. In McNamara JA Jr, Brudon Wl (eds.) Orthodontic and Orthopedic Treatment in the Mixed Dentition. USA: Needham press Inc., 1993;13-54.
• lindsay WK, leMesurier AB, Farmer AW. A study of speech results of a large series of cleft palate patients. plast Reconstr Surg 1962;29:273-288.
• 18. Evans D, Renfrew C. The timing of primary cleft palate repair. Scand J plast Reconstr Surg 1974;8:153-155.
• Dorf DS, Curtin JW. Early cleft palate repair and speech outcome. plast Reconstr Surg 1982;70:74-81.
• Kremenak CR, Huffman WC, Olin WH. Growth of maxillae in dogs after palatal surgery: part I. Cleft palate J 1967;4:6-17.
• Kremenak CR, Huffman WC, Olin WH. Maxillary growth inhibition by mucoperiosteal denudation of palatal shelf bone in non-cleft beagles. Cleft palate J 1970;7:817-825.
• Bernstein l. The effect of timing of cleft palate operations on subsequent growth of the maxilla. laryngoscope 1965;78:1510-1565.
• Blocksma R, leuz CA, Mellerstig KE. A conservative program for managing cleft palates without the use of mucoperiosteal flaps. plast Reconstr Surg 1975;55:160-169.
• Graber TM. Craniofacial morphology in cleft palate and cleft lip deformities. Surg Gynec Obstet 1949;88:359-369.
• Graber TM. The congenital cleft palate deformity. J Am Dent Ass 1954;48:375-395.
• Slaughter WB, Brodie AG. Facial clefts and their surgical management in view of recent research. plast Reconstr Surg 1949;4:311-332.
• Kremenak CR, Huffman WC, Olin WH. Growth of maxillae in dogs after palatal surgery: part II. Cleft palate J 1970;7:719-736.
• Hugg JR, Kremenak CR. Growth of maxillae in dogs after palatal surgery studied with the aid of vital staining. Am J Orthod 1968;54:930-931.
• Ross RB. The clinical implications of facial growth in cleft lip and palate. Cleft palate J 1969;7:37-47.
• Dahl E. Transverse maxillary growth in combined cleft lip and palate: A longitudinal roentgenocephalometric study by the implant method. Cleft palate J 1979;16:34-41.
• Hayashi I, Sakuda M, Takimoto K, Miyazaki T. Craniofacial growth in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate: A roentgenocephalometric study. Cleft palate J 1976;13:215-237.
• perko MA. Two-stage closure of cleft palate. J Maxillofac Surg 1979;7:6-.
• Slaughter WB, pruzansky S. The rational for velar closure as a primary procedure in the repair of cleft palate defects. plast Reconstr Surg 1954;13:341-357.
• Jolleys A. A review of the results of operations on cleft palate with reference to maxillary growth and speech function. Br J plast Surg 1954;7:229-241.
• Schweckendiek W. primary veloplasty: long-term results without maxillary deformity. A twenty-five year report. Cleft palate J 1978;15:268-274.
• Berkowitz S. Timing of palatal closure should not be based on age alone. Cleft palate J 1985;22:132.
• Ritsila V, Alhopuro S, laine p, Ranta R. Closure of the physiological cleft upper lip in growing rabbits: An example of the effect of soft tissue changes on jaw growth. proc Finn Dent Soc 1973;69:217-219.
• Bardach J, Kelly KM, Jakobsen JR. Simultaneous cleft lip and palate repair: An experimental study in beagles. plast Reconstr Surg 1988;82:31-41.
• Davies D. The one-stage repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate: A preliminary report. plast Reconstr Surg 1966;38:129-136.
• Wada T,Miyazaki T.Treatment principles for the changing arch form in children with complete unilateral cleft lips and palates. Cleft palate J 1976;13:273-283.
• Haapanen Ml. Factors affecting speech in patients with isolated cleft palate. Scand J plast Reconstr Hand Surg Suppl 1992; 26:1-61.
• Desai SN. Early cleft palate repair completed before the age of 16 weeks: Observations on a personal series of 100 children. Br J plast Surg 1983;36:300-304.
• Randall p, laRossa D, Fakhraee SM. Cleft palate closure at 3 to 7 months of age: A preliminary report. plast Reconstr Surg 1983;71:624-628.
• Grobbelaar AO, Hudson DA, Fernandes DB. Speech results after repair of the cleft soft palate. plast Reconstr Surg 1995;95:1150-1154.
• Rohrich RJ, Gosman AA. An update on the timing of hard palate closure: A critical long-term analysis. plast Reconstr Surg 2004;113:350-352.
• Marrinan EM, laBrie RA, Mulliken JB. Velopharyngeal function in non-syndromic cleft palate: Relevance of surgical technique, age at repair, and cleft type. Cleft palate Craniofac J 1998;35:95-100.
• Ysunza A, pamplona C, Mendoza M, Garcia- Velasco M, Aguilar p, Guerrero E. Speech outcome and maxillary growth in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip/palate operated on at 6 versus 12 months of age. plast Reconstr Surg 1998;102:675-679.
• Song R, Song Y, liu C et al. A method of “unilateral operation” for early repair of unilateral complete cleft palate. preliminary report. Cleft palate Craniofac J 2000; 37: 243-247.
• Wyatt R, Sell D, Russell J, Harding A, Harland K, Albery E. Cleft palate speech dissected: A review of current knowledge and analysis. Br J plast Surg 1996;49:143-149.
• Özgür F. Damak yarığı ameliyat zamanlaması. In Erk Y, Özgür F. (eds.) Dudak ve Damak Yarıkları. Ankara: İşkur Matbaacılık ltd. Şti., 1999;127-129.
• Chapman Kl. phonologic processes in children with cleft palate. Cleft palate Craniofac J 1993;30:64-72.
• Fara M, Brousilova M. Experiences with early closure of velum and later closure of hard palate. plast Reconstr Surg 1969;44:134-141.
• Cosman B, Falk AS. Delayed hard palate repair and speech deficiencies: A cautionary report. Cleft palate J 1980;17:27-33.
• Jackson IT, Mclennan G, Scheker lR. primary veloplasty or primary palatoplasty: Some preliminary findings. plast Reconstr Surg 1983;72:153-157.
• Bardach J, Morris Hl, Olin WH. late results of primary veloplasty: The Marburg project. plast Reconstr Surg 1984;73:207-215.
• Noordhoff MS, Kuo J, Wang F, Huang H, Witzel, M.A.Development of articulation before delayed hard palate closure in children with cleft palate: A cross-sectional study. plast Reconstr Surg 1987;80:518-524.
• Ovesen T, Blegvad-Andersen O. Alterations in tympanic membrane appearance and middle ear function in 11year old children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate compared with healthy agmatched subjects. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1992;17:203-207.
• Rynell-Dagöö B, lindberg K, Bagger-Sjöback D, larson O. Middle ear disease in cleft palate children at three years of age. Int J pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1992;23:201-209.
• Smith Tl, DiRuggiero DC, Jones KR. Recovery of Eustachian tube function and hearing outcome in patients with cleft palate. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1994;11:423-429.
• Handzic-Cuk J, Cuk V, Risavi R, Katusic D, Stajner-Katusic S. Hearing levels and age in cleft palate patients. Int J pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1996;37:227-242.
• paradise Jl, Bluestone CD. Early treatment of the universal otitis media of infants with cleft palate. pediatrics 1974;53:48-54.
• Too-Chung MA. The assessment of middle ear function and hearing by tympanometry in children before and after cleft palate repair. Br J plast Surg 1983;36:295-299.
• Mars M, Houston WJB. A preliminary study of facial growth and morphology in unoperated male unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects over 13 years of age. Cleft palate J 1990;27:7-10.
• Subtelny JD. Width of the nasopharynx and related anatomic structures in normal and unoperated cleft palate children. Am J Orthod 1955;41:889-.
• Blain Hl. Differential analysis of cleft palate anomalies. J Dent Res 1969;48(part I):1042-1048.
• Osborne HA. A serial cephalometric analysis of facial growth in adolescent cleft palate subjects. Angle Orthod 1966;36:211-223.
• Ishiguro K, Krogman WM, Mazeheri M, Harding Rl. A longitudinal study of morphological craniofacial patterns via p-A X-ray headfilms in cleft patients from birth to six years of age. Cleft palate J 1976;13:104-126.
• Wepner F, Hollmann K. Mid-face anthropometry on the cephalometric radiograph in cleft lip and palate cases. J Maxillofac Surg 1975;3:188-197.
• Björk A. Sutural growth of the upper face studied by the implant method. Acta Odontol Scand 1966; 24:109-127.
• lestrel pE, Berkowitz S, Takahashi O. Shape changes in the cleft palate maxilla: A longitudinal study. Cleft palate Craniofac J 1999;36:292-303.