Assessment of Maxillary Arch Form in Individuals With Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

Objective To analyze and compare maxillary arch forms in unilateral (UCLP), bilateral (BCLP) cleft lip and palate and control group patients Materials and Methods The research involved 450 patients (220 males, 230 females) aged 13 to 16, seeking orthodontic treatment at Ege University Orthodontics Department. Maxillary models of 150 UCLP, 150 BCLP, and 150 Angle Class I malocclusion (control) patients were evaluated for narrow, ovoid, and square forms using the 'OrthoForm-3M Unitek' template. Statistical analyses utilized IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0, employing a chi-square test to assess significance. Results Control group analysis showed ovoid arch form most common (51.7%), followed by narrow (32.2%) and square (16.1%). UCLP patients had most narrow form (37.3%), followed by ovoid (32.7%) and square (30%). BCLP patients had most square form (46.4%), followed by narrow (42.3%) and ovoid (11.3%). Significant differences in arc forms were found between UCLP/BCLP and control (p < 0.000). Cramer's V Test showed moderate correlation (Cramer's V = 0.265; p = 0.00). No gender differences were found (p = 0.879), and no arc form-gender correlation (p = 0.235). Conclusion Maxillary arch forms differ between UCLP and BCLP patients. UCLP patients commonly have narrow arch, while BCLP patients show square form. UCLP patients tend to have less square arch, BCLP patients less ovoid. In Angle Class I without CLP, ovoid is common, square least. The narrower maxillary arch form of CLP patients compared to those without CLP holds clinical importance, especially in treatment planning. Clinical Relevance: The importance of maxillary arch form in CLP treatment planning, as well as the potential impact on treatment outcomes