The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate
Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Parhofer, Robert [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2023 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Clinical Oral Investigations - Springer-Verlag, 2001, 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:27 ; year:2023 ; number:9 ; day:23 ; month:06 ; pages:5001-5009 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR053031792 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR053031792 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230910064632.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230910s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR053031792 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Parhofer, Robert |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 4 | |a The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © The Author(s) 2023 | ||
| 520 | |a Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Nasoalveolar molding |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Passive alveolar molding |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cleft lip palate |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Presurgical orthodontics |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Maxillary growth |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rau, Andrea |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Strobel, Karin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gölz, Lina |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Stark, Renée |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ritschl, Lucas M. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kesting, Marco R. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Grill, Florian D. |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Seidel, Corinna L. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical Oral Investigations |d Springer-Verlag, 2001 |g 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 |w (DE-627)SPR007794231 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:27 |g year:2023 |g number:9 |g day:23 |g month:06 |g pages:5001-5009 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 27 |j 2023 |e 9 |b 23 |c 06 |h 5001-5009 | ||
| author_variant |
r p rp a r ar k s ks l g lg r s rs l m r lm lmr k d w kdw m r k mr mrk f d g fd fdg c l s cl cls |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
parhoferrobertrauandreastrobelkaringlzli:2023----:hipcopsielelrodnvnsavoamlignlfwdhnohraaeesfail |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2023 |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 doi (DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Parhofer, Robert verfasserin aut The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rau, Andrea aut Strobel, Karin aut Gölz, Lina aut Stark, Renée aut Ritschl, Lucas M. aut Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich aut Kesting, Marco R. aut Grill, Florian D. aut Seidel, Corinna L. aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 27 2023 9 23 06 5001-5009 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 doi (DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Parhofer, Robert verfasserin aut The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rau, Andrea aut Strobel, Karin aut Gölz, Lina aut Stark, Renée aut Ritschl, Lucas M. aut Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich aut Kesting, Marco R. aut Grill, Florian D. aut Seidel, Corinna L. aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 27 2023 9 23 06 5001-5009 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 doi (DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Parhofer, Robert verfasserin aut The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rau, Andrea aut Strobel, Karin aut Gölz, Lina aut Stark, Renée aut Ritschl, Lucas M. aut Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich aut Kesting, Marco R. aut Grill, Florian D. aut Seidel, Corinna L. aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 27 2023 9 23 06 5001-5009 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 doi (DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Parhofer, Robert verfasserin aut The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rau, Andrea aut Strobel, Karin aut Gölz, Lina aut Stark, Renée aut Ritschl, Lucas M. aut Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich aut Kesting, Marco R. aut Grill, Florian D. aut Seidel, Corinna L. aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 27 2023 9 23 06 5001-5009 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 doi (DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Parhofer, Robert verfasserin aut The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rau, Andrea aut Strobel, Karin aut Gölz, Lina aut Stark, Renée aut Ritschl, Lucas M. aut Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich aut Kesting, Marco R. aut Grill, Florian D. aut Seidel, Corinna L. aut Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations Springer-Verlag, 2001 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 (DE-627)SPR007794231 nnns volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 27 2023 9 23 06 5001-5009 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Clinical Oral Investigations 27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009 volume:27 year:2023 number:9 day:23 month:06 pages:5001-5009 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Nasoalveolar molding Passive alveolar molding Cleft lip palate Presurgical orthodontics Maxillary growth |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
| container_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Parhofer, Robert @@aut@@ Rau, Andrea @@aut@@ Strobel, Karin @@aut@@ Gölz, Lina @@aut@@ Stark, Renée @@aut@@ Ritschl, Lucas M. @@aut@@ Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich @@aut@@ Kesting, Marco R. @@aut@@ Grill, Florian D. @@aut@@ Seidel, Corinna L. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2023-06-23T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
SPR007794231 |
| id |
SPR053031792 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR053031792</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230910064632.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230910s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR053031792</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Parhofer, Robert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nasoalveolar molding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Passive alveolar molding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cleft lip palate</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Presurgical orthodontics</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maxillary growth</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rau, Andrea</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Strobel, Karin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gölz, Lina</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Stark, Renée</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ritschl, Lucas M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kesting, Marco R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grill, Florian D.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Seidel, Corinna L.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical Oral Investigations</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR007794231</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:27</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:5001-5009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">27</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">5001-5009</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Parhofer, Robert |
| spellingShingle |
Parhofer, Robert misc Nasoalveolar molding misc Passive alveolar molding misc Cleft lip palate misc Presurgical orthodontics misc Maxillary growth The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| authorStr |
Parhofer, Robert |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)SPR007794231 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate Nasoalveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Passive alveolar molding (dpeaa)DE-He213 Cleft lip palate (dpeaa)DE-He213 Presurgical orthodontics (dpeaa)DE-He213 Maxillary growth (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Nasoalveolar molding misc Passive alveolar molding misc Cleft lip palate misc Presurgical orthodontics misc Maxillary growth |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Nasoalveolar molding misc Passive alveolar molding misc Cleft lip palate misc Presurgical orthodontics misc Maxillary growth |
| topic_browse |
misc Nasoalveolar molding misc Passive alveolar molding misc Cleft lip palate misc Presurgical orthodontics misc Maxillary growth |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
SPR007794231 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)SPR007794231 |
| title |
The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR053031792 (SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e |
| title_full |
The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| author_sort |
Parhofer, Robert |
| journal |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| journalStr |
Clinical Oral Investigations |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
true |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2023 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
5001 |
| author_browse |
Parhofer, Robert Rau, Andrea Strobel, Karin Gölz, Lina Stark, Renée Ritschl, Lucas M. Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich Kesting, Marco R. Grill, Florian D. Seidel, Corinna L. |
| container_volume |
27 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Parhofer, Robert |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |
| title_sort |
impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| title_auth |
The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| abstract |
Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| abstractGer |
Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences. © The Author(s) 2023 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER |
| container_issue |
9 |
| title_short |
The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Rau, Andrea Strobel, Karin Gölz, Lina Stark, Renée Ritschl, Lucas M. Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich Kesting, Marco R. Grill, Florian D. Seidel, Corinna L. |
| author2Str |
Rau, Andrea Strobel, Karin Gölz, Lina Stark, Renée Ritschl, Lucas M. Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich Kesting, Marco R. Grill, Florian D. Seidel, Corinna L. |
| ppnlink |
SPR007794231 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
true |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T16:33:58.286Z |
| _version_ |
1803576345401229312 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR053031792</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230910064632.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230910s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR053031792</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00784-023-05119-7-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Parhofer, Robert</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The impact of passive alveolar molding vs. nasoalveolar molding on cleft width and other parameters of maxillary growth in unilateral cleft lip palate</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Objective Passive alveolar molding (PAM) and nasoalveolar molding (NAM) are established presurgical infant orthodontic (PSIO) therapies for cleft lip palate (CLP) patients. PAM guides maxillary growth with a modified Hotz appliance, while NAM also uses extraoral taping and includes nasal stents. The effects of these techniques on alveolar arch growth have rarely been compared. Material and methods We retrospectively compared 3D-scanned maxillary models obtained before and after PSIO from infants with unilateral, non-syndromic CLP treated with PAM (n = 16) versus NAM (n = 13). Nine anatomical points were set digitally by four raters and transversal/sagittal distances and rotations of the maxilla were measured. Results Both appliances reduced the anterior cleft, but NAM percentage wise more. NAM decreased the anterior and medial transversal width compared to PAM, which led to no change. With both appliances, the posterior width increased. The alveolar arch length of the great and small segments and the sagittal length of the maxilla increased with PAM but only partially with NAM. However, NAM induced a significant greater medial rotation of the larger and smaller segment compared to PAM with respect to the lateral angle. Conclusions NAM and PAM presented some significant differences regarding maxillary growth. While NAM reduced the anterior cleft and effectively rotated the segments medially, PAM allowed more transversal and sagittal growth. Clinical relevance The results of this study should be taken into consideration when to decide whether to use PAM or NAM, since they show a different outcome within the first few months. Further studies are necessary regarding long-term differences.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Nasoalveolar molding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Passive alveolar molding</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cleft lip palate</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Presurgical orthodontics</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Maxillary growth</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rau, Andrea</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Strobel, Karin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gölz, Lina</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Stark, Renée</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ritschl, Lucas M.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wolff, Klaus-Dietrich</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kesting, Marco R.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grill, Florian D.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Seidel, Corinna L.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Clinical Oral Investigations</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">27(2023), 9 vom: 23. Juni, Seite 5001-5009</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR007794231</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:27</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:23</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:5001-5009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05119-7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">27</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">23</subfield><subfield code="c">06</subfield><subfield code="h">5001-5009</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.397993 |