This study aimed to compare the linear dimensions of the dental arches of adult patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) after orthodontic and prosthetic treatment with fixed partial dentures (FPD) to patients without clefts, using 3D technology. This retrospective longitudinal study sample consisted of 35 subjects divided into two groups. Included in this sample were 15 complete UCLP individuals who had received orthodontic treatment before rehabilitation with a fixed partial denture (FG), as well as 20 patients without cleft as control group (CG). All patients were aged between 18 and 30 years. Digital dental casts were obtained in two stages: (T1) end of orthodontic treatment and (T2) one year after prosthetic rehabilitation (FG); and (T1) end of orthodontic treatment and (T2) one year after removal of the orthodontic appliance (CG). Intercanine, interfirst premolar and intermolar distances, and incisor-molar length were obtained. A precalibrated and trained examiner performed the assessments. Intergroup differences between T2 and T1 were compared between the groups using the t test or Mann-Whitney test with a significance level of 5% (p<0.05). The intercanine distance variation (T2-T1) showed statistical difference (p=0.005) increasing in the FG group and decreasing in the CG group. In the interfirst premolar distance variation, FG decreased, while CG increased with statistically significant difference (p=0.008). The intercanine distance of individuals with cleft showed stability, while that of the CG had no stability. The CG showed stability in the interfirst premolar distance, while FG had no stability. These findings showed that the FPD is capable of restricting orthodontic results, leading to a stabilization of the dental arches.

The aim of the present study was to compare the linear dimensions of dental arches of patients with cleft lip and palate following orthodontic and prosthetic treatment with fixed partial denture and patients without cleft lip and palate immediately after orthodontics and at least one year after removal of the orthodontic appliance. This retrospective longitudinal study consisted of a sample of 70 digital models, of which 30 models were from patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate, who received a fixed partial prosthesis in the cleft region (n = 15), cleft lip and palate group (CLPG); and 40 patient models without cleft lip and palate (n = 20), control group (CG); aged between 18 and 30 years. The models were obtained in two stages: (T1) end of orthodontic treatment, and (T2) at least 1 year after prosthetic rehabilitation (CLPG); and (T1) end of orthodontic treatment and (T2) at least one year after removal of the orthodontic appliance (CG). Measurements of the dimensions of the dental arches were performed directly on the scanned images, using the 3Shape's R700TM Scanner and measured by the Appliance Designer Software. The dimensions evaluated were: inter-canine distance, inter-1 st premolars distance, intermolar distance, and incisormolar length. A pre-calibrated and trained examiner performed the assessments. Comparisons were made between the groups at different times (T1 and T2); and in the difference between T2 and T1 in the groups (CLPG and CG); using the T or Mann-Whitney test, with a significance level of 5% (p <0.05). There was a statistical difference (p = 0.005) in the value of the T2-T1 variation in the intercanine distance with increase in the ClG distance and decrease in the CG. In the interprémolar distance variation the ClG presented a decrease in value and the CG showed an increase, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.008). In the other parameters (intermolar and molar incisors) there was no statistical difference. There was not stability in the CG in the intercanine distance and there was stability in the CLPG, there was stability in the CG in the inter-pre-molar distance and there was no stability in the CLPG. Partial Fixed Prosthesis stabilizes the results obtained with orthodontics.

A meus pais, Jorge e Carla; e à minhas irmãs, Carla e Mariana.As minhas avós, Mamá Lolo e Mamá Helena. AGRADECIMENTOSÀ Deus, por tudo, pela vida, por minha linda família, por todas a graças derramadas em minha vida; por me dar a oportunidade de estar aqui; porque as coisas sempre vão melhor com sua ajuda.Aos meus filhos, que são a razão da minha vida, o motor que sempre me empurra para frente, me ajudando a superar as diversas dificuldades que se apresentam na vida.A minha esposa, Roxana, por seu amor, sua amizade, seu companheirismo; por ser um apoio sempre, por me incentivar a continuar nessa caminhada em direção aos nossos sonhos, por ser lutadora como ela é, por conseguirmos juntos passar por decisões difíceis, por momentos difíceis; não foi fácil para nenhum dos dois estar longe, mas conseguimos. Aos meus pais, Jorge e Carla; por seu apoio que esteve sempre presente; por seu amor incondicional. Sempre foram e serão meu exemplo de esforço e dedicação.Embora estivessem longe, eles estavam sempre próximos.As minhas irmãs, por seu apoio, por compartilhar meus sonhos. Pelos ensinamentos durante toda minha vida.A minha orientadora, Profa. Dra. Simone Soares, estou muito agradecido pelos ensinamentos, pelo tempo dedicado, pela paciência, pelo apoio, pelo carinho e pela confiança depositada em mim. Tenho um carinho, admiração, gratidão e respeito enorme por você. Tenho muito que agradecer quanto ao meu crescimento profissional e pessoal, sobretudo no que concerne à docência. Tantas vivências, momentos compartilhados, alegrias, tristezas, trabalho duro, infinitas lembranças que levarei pelo resto da minha vida. Muito obrigado professora, sem você nada disto seria possível.A pandemia trouxe muitos desafios para todo o mundo, todos nós que fazemos parte da USP não somos exceção, agradeço de forma muito especial à Profa. Dra. Simone