Finite element growth analysis for the craniofacial skeleton in patients with cleft lip and palate

• Published in: Medical engineering & physics Vol. 26; no. 2; pp. 109 - 118
• Main Authors: Sasaki, Akiko, Takeshita, Satoshi, Publico, Andre S, Moss, Melvin L, Tanaka, Eiji, Ishino, Yoshihiro, Watanabe, Mineo, Tanne, Kazuo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Elsevier Ltd 01.03.2004
• Subjects: Adolescent; Age Factors; Aging; Cephalometry - methods; Child; Child, Preschool; Cleft Lip - diagnosis; Cleft Lip - physiopathology; Cleft lip and palate patients; Cleft Palate - diagnosis; Cleft Palate - physiopathology; Computer Simulation; Craniofacial Abnormalities - diagnosis; Craniofacial Abnormalities - physiopathology; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods; Facial Bones - abnormalities; Facial Bones - growth & development; Female; Finite Element Analysis; Finite element method; Human craniofacial growth; Humans; Male; Models, Biological; Sex Factors; Skull - abnormalities; Skull - growth & development; Finite element method; Human craniofacial growth; Cleft lip and palate patients
• ISSN: 1350-4533; 1873-4030
• DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2003.10.005

The purpose of this study was to clarify the differences in the nature of craniofacial growth between subjects with normal occlusion and patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate (CLP) in terms of the size, shape and principal growth direction of craniofacial skeleton using finite element method (FEM). Lateral cephalograms were taken of 40 subjects as normal group and 178 patients as CLP group. These subjects were divided into seven developmental ages of 4-, 6-, 8-, 10-, 12-, 14- and 18-year-old. For the finite element analysis, the craniofacial complex was discretized into seven structures or elements with three nodal points in each after tracing each lateral cephalogram on acetate paper. For each stage, the growth parameters in CLP group were compared to those in normal group. The growth of upper facial skeleton and maxillary complex was more remarkably inhibited in CLP than in normal group. Especially, the growth inhibition of posterior maxillary complex in a vertical direction was remarkable in CLP group at any ages. Difference in the size and shape of entire mandibular skeleton between CLP and normal groups was not apparent. It is suggested that grow timing and peak velocity, an essential and key determinant to the success in orthodontic treatment, have been clarified in this study more clearly than in previous studies. It is hopefully anticipated to explore some key determinants to predict individual growth of the craniofacial skeleton near future.