This group of Chinese children with CLP demonstrated statistically significant higher prevalences of hypodontia, microdontia, and delayed dental development on the cleft side than the noncleft side.
This group of southern Chinese children with cleft lip and palate demonstrated a higher prevalence of asymmetric and delayed dental development than did their counterparts who did not have cleft lip and palate.
Background:The prevalence of dental anomalies in children with cleft lip and palate (CLP) has been said to be higher than in the normal children; however, such findings have not been expressed for different racial groups.Aim: To determine the prevalence of anomalies in children with CLP and to ascertain if there were any differences between the prevalence figures for CLP and non-CLP children.Design: This is a retrospective study looking at previously collected clinical records. The sample consisted of 231 pairs of age and gender matched CLP and non-CLP southern Chinese aged between 12 and 16 years. The dental records of the subjects were examined to gather data on anomalies of tooth number, size and shape.Results: It was found that 57.6% of the CLP children had hypodontia, 10.0% hyperdontia, 8.7% taurodontism, 0.8% a double tooth, 1.30% dens evaginatus, and 42.4% had microdontia in the permanent dentition. The CLP subjects had a statistically higher prevalence of hypodontia (p<0.001), supernumerary (p<0.01) and microdontia (p<0.001) than the non-CLP subjects. More CLP children, were found to have one to three types of anomalies, than the non-CLP children (p<0.001).
Conclusion:This group of Chinese CLP children demonstrated a higher prevalence of dental anomalies than the non-CLP children.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.