Abstract
Abstract Introduction We performed a retrospective comparison between secondary and ter-tiary cleft patients. Materials and methods Twelve patients with unilateral alve-olar clefts were included and divided according to age at the time of alveo-lar cleft grafting between two groups. Group I included secondary alveolar cleft grafting patients while group II included tertiary alveolar cleft grafting counterparts. All patients received a mandibular symphyseal graft augmented with allogeneic demineralised freeze-dried graft. Review of the clinical and cone beam computed tomography volumet-ric radiographic assessment at six months and then at one year interval was performed. Statistical analysis of the volumetric data was performed. Results The total mean graft volume for group I during follow-up period was 162.60 mm 3 while that of group II during follow-up period was 178.79 mm 3 . However, the mean of resorption throughout the study in the group II exceeded that of the group I. There was no statistical significant difference regarding the mean of graft resorption. Secondary alveolar grafting procedures appear to have enhanced clinical and
Highlights
We performed a retrospective comparison between secondary and tertiary cleft patients
Patients suffering from complete clefts of the lip and palate require continuous interdisciplinary care from birth to adulthood
The osseous closure of the alveolar cleft, which is required for the formation of a stable maxillary dental arch, occupies a special position within the whole concept of cleft lip and palate therapy[1]
Summary
We performed a retrospective comparison between secondary and tertiary cleft patients. Group I included secondary alveolar cleft grafting patients while group II included tertiary alveolar cleft grafting counterparts. The osseous closure of the alveolar cleft, which is required for the formation of a stable maxillary dental arch, occupies a special position within the whole concept of cleft lip and palate therapy[1]. The benefits of alveolar cleft grafting (ACG) include: stabilisation of the maxillary arch, elimination of oronasal fistulae, creation of bony support for subsequent tooth eruption, and reconstruction of the hypoplastic pyriform aperture and soft tissue nasal base support. In 1990, the German Association for Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery adopted a worthy classification of alveolar bone grafting that was based on the stage of dental development while establishing common terminology for surgeons:
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
