No abstract

Objectives: To assess the perceived facial changes in class II division 1, convex profile patients treated with functional followed by fixed orthodontic appliances. Subjects and methods: The study sample consisted of 36 pairs of pre-and post-treatment photographs (frontal and profile, at rest) of 12 patients treated with activator, 12 with twin-block, and 12 controls with normal profiles, treated without functional appliances. All photographs were presented in pairs to 10 orthodontists, 10 patients, 10 parents, and 10 laypersons. Visual analog scale (VAS) ratings of changes in facial appearance were assessed. Results: The patient groups were similar in sex distributions, age, and treatment duration. The different rater groups showed strong to excellent agreement. There were no significant differences among treatment groups (F = 0.91; P = 0.526; Wilks lambda = 0.93), raters (F = 1.68; P = 0.054; Wilks lambda = 0.83), and when testing the combined effect of treatment and rater on the results (F = 0.72; P = 0.866; Wilks lambda = 0.85). The raters detected slightly more positive changes in the activator and twin-block groups, compared to the control group, regarding the lower face and the lips, but these findings did not reach significance. Furthermore, their magnitude hardly exceeded 1/20th of the total VAS length. Limitations: Retrospective study design. Conclusions: The perceived facial changes of convex profile patients treated with functional, followed by fixed orthodontic appliances, did not differ from those observed in normal profile patients, when full-face frontal and profile photos were simultaneously assessed. Consequently, professionals should be skeptical regarding the improvement of a patient's facial appearance when this treatment option is used.

Objectives To evaluate, using meta-analysis methodology, mesiodistal tooth dimensions in non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate (CLP) patients. Materials and methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar Beta, EMBASE Excerpta Medica, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Collaboration, identifying English and nonEnglish articles reporting on mesiodistal tooth dimensions on the cleft and non-cleft side of non-syndromic unilateral CLP patients. Additional studies were identified by searching reference lists of articles consulted. Only studies with a suitable control group were included. Two examiners independently performed the literature search and data extraction. Using meta-analysis software, data extracted from each selected study were statistically combined using the fixedeffects model. Weighted mean differences, 95 % confidence intervals, and heterogeneity were calculated for each measurement.Results Four articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria were located and included in the meta-analysis. Maxillary incisors and first molars were found to be significantly larger on the non-cleft side while mandibular incisors and premolars were larger on the cleft side, in nonsyndromic unilateral CLP patients. On the cleft side, maxillary premolars and second molars were larger in cleft than control patients while incisors were smaller, whereas all mandibular teeth were larger in cleft patients. On the non-cleft side, all maxillary teeth except for the central incisors were larger in the cleft than control patients, while all mandibular teeth were larger in the cleft patients except for lateral incisors. Conclusions Non-syndromic unilateral CLP patients tend to have larger posterior but smaller anterior teeth compared with the general population. Comparing sides, unilateral CLP patients tend to have smaller maxillary but larger mandibular teeth on the cleft than on the non-cleft side. Clinical relevance Given that obtaining a stable, functional, and esthetic occlusion requires a thorough evaluation of tooth size, knowledge about trends in tooth size variations in CLP patients can help with dental and orthodontic treatment planning.