Objectives Cephalometric analyses using lateral craniofacial radiographs are common diagnostic procedures for evaluating skeletal patterns. However, in patients with pronounced abnormalities like cleft lip and palate, standard cephalometric analyses and landmarks may not be suitable. This study aims to clarify whether the inclusion of landmarks less compromised by the cleft defect or located outside the cleft area results in a different cephalometric assessment of the viscerocranium. Delaire’s whole-skull analysis and Bergen analysis were examined for similarities and underlying common observations. Materials/methods Based on the cephalometric evaluation of 217 patients with different types of non-syndromal cleft formation, Delaire and Bergen analysis were compared using three statistical methods: correlation analysis, factor analysis, and cluster analysis. Reproducibility was assessed by Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and coefficients of variability. Results Although Delaire analysis and Bergen analysis are based on different concepts and landmarks, a majority of corresponding variables was found. Certain aspects of craniofacial base relation and craniospinal articulation are only assessed by Delaire analysis. All but one variable showed very good reproducibility. Conclusions The inclusion of landmarks less compromised by or located outside the cleft area does not result in variables that provide a different assessment of the viscerocranial area. Clinical Relevance The findings contradict the concept of invalidity of landmarks compromised by the cleft defect or located within the affected cleft area. Within the scope of its viscerocranial field of view, Bergen analysis appears to be on a par with Delaire analysis in the diagnosis of cleft patients.

No abstract

Background The Multiloop Edgewise Archwire (MEAW) appliance is an orthodontic treatment method suitable for the therapy of severe types of malocclusions such as open bites or anterior crossbites. The cephalometric Denture Frame Analysis (DFA) provides a supportive diagnostic tool for patient-specific treatment planning concerning the rearrangement of occlusion within the “denture frame”. The objective of this study is to give a comprehensive overview of the national and international scientific literature about MEAW and DFA regarding the general therapeutic effects, advantages and limitations. Methods and materials A computerized literature search was performed using four principal medical databases (PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and supplemented by manual searching of the references listed in the retrieved articles. The results were screened and assessed following the PRISMA guidelines. Results Six hundred seventy-seven full articles were assessed for eligibility. A number of 134 articles went through qualitative analysis and 3 studies were finally involved in comparative synopsis. The findings reveal advantageous characteristics of the MEAW technique such as a high degree of three-dimensional individual tooth control and a comparatively low load deflection rate, causing mostly dentoalveolar changes without significantly influencing the skeletal structures. Conclusion Based on current literature, the MEAW technique appears to have several therapeutic benefits and serves as a sufficient alternative treatment method for dentoalveolar compensation, when measures of orthognathic surgery are rejected. Concerning the deficient data basis of available literature and the low level of scientific evidence, further studies are required in order to expand on the knowledge in this subject area. Several aspects like the effectiveness or the long-term stability have to be evaluated more extensively. Moreover, the transferability of the DFA to ethnic groups other than the Asian ethnicity should be examined further.

No abstract

No abstract