Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 17, 2026
Midface Hypoplasia and Cranial Base Morphology in Syndromic Craniosynostosis: A Comparative Analysis Study Using a Predictive Regression Model
Published on: November 4, 2025
Maxillary arch dimensions in cleft infants in Northern Finland
Virpi Harila1, Leena P Ylikontiola, Riitta Palola
1Department of Oral Development and Orthodontics, Institute of Dentistry, University of Oulu, Oulu Cleft Lip and Palate Center, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland. virpi.harila@oulu.fi
Insights
Maxillary arch dimensions in infants with cleft lip and/or palate show significant variation by cleft type before surgery. This study highlights the diversity in cleft severity and its impact on facial development.
Area of Science:
- Craniofacial development
- Pediatric surgery
- Genetics and developmental biology
Background:
- Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) is a common congenital anomaly.
- Understanding pre-surgical maxillary arch dimensions is crucial for treatment planning.
- Phenotypic variability significantly impacts CL/P presentation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze maxillary arch dimensions in infants with CL/P in Northern Finland prior to surgical intervention.
- To establish baseline measurements for different cleft types.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 70 infant patient casts (1997-2004).
- Measurements included cleft width, arch circumference, anterior/posterior arch width, and arch length.
- Statistical analysis using ANOVA to compare cleft groups.
Main Results:
- Significant differences observed in cleft width, arch dimensions, and circumference across various cleft types.
- Cleft palate (CP) represented 60% of cases, a higher prevalence than average.
- Boys generally exhibited larger clefts and arch dimensions, though not statistically significant.
Conclusions:
- Cleft lip and/or palate exhibits considerable variation in severity and maxillary arch dimensions at birth.
- Phenotypic variability plays a key role in the presentation of CL/P.
- Pre-surgical measurements provide insight into the anatomical challenges associated with different cleft types.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to examine the maxillary arch dimensions in cleft lip and/or palate infants in Northern Finland before surgery.
Materials And Methods:
The subjects consisted of 70 Finnish cleft patients born between 1997-2004 in Northern Ostrobothnia Hospital District in Finland. The study casts were obtained before surgery at the mean age of 5.6 months (SD = 2.2). There were 42 children with cleft palate (CP) (26 girls/16 boys), 13 with unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) (eight girls/five boys), eight children with cleft lip (CL)(two girls/six boys) and seven with bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) (two girls/five boys). Conventionally-used landmarks were marked on study casts and cleft width, arch circumference, anterior and posterior arch width and arch length were measured with a digital sliding calliper. The statistical method was ANOVA.
Results:
The prevalence of CP in this study, 60% of all clefts, is higher than the average standards. There were statistically significant differences in cleft width, posterior and anterior arch width, arch length and arch circumference, when different cleft groups were compared. When differences between girls and boys were compared, boys had larger cleft size and arch dimensions generally, but the results were not statistically significant.
Conclusions:
The results show the large variation in the severity of cleft lip and/or palate deformity at birth and in maxillary arch dimensions between different cleft types. It also demonstrates the effect of phenotypic variability within the groups of cleft lip and/or palate.
