Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
Morphometric Evaluation of the Pterygomaxillary Suture in Patients with Unilateral and Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate
Salma Tabatabaei1, Hamid Reza Heidari2, Maryam Paknahad3
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare the morphology of the pterygomaxillary suture (PMS) in unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP), bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP), and non-cleft (NC) individuals using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), focusing on side-specific differences relevant to Le Fort I osteotomy planning.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.SettingOral and maxillofacial radiology clinic of a university-affiliated center, where CBCT data were originally obtained for diagnostic purposes.PatientsOne hundred and fifty-six subjects-57 UCLP, 21 BCLP, and 78 NC-matched for age and sex (P > .25). Inclusion required complete records and high-quality CBCT scans; patients with syndromic anomalies or prior orthognathic surgery were excluded.InterventionsCBCT scans were retrospectively analyzed using standardized NNT software (v 6.2). Anatomical landmarks were referenced to the midsagittal plane for reproducibility.Main Outcome MeasuresSeven PMS parameters-thickness, width, length, angulation, lateral pterygoid plate (LPP) length, medial pterygoid plate (MPP) length, and distance to the greater palatine foramen (GPF)-were compared using ANOVA, paired-sample t-tests, and Tukey post-hoc analyses (α = 0.05).ResultsPMS angulation was higher in UCLP (79.82 ± 7.96°) and BCLP (79.84 ± 9.11°) compared with NC (75.90 ± 8.07; P < .001). In UCLP, the cleft side showed greater angulation and shorter LPP (P = .027; P = .001). Other parameters did not differ significantly.ConclusionsCLP patients show increased PMS angulation and cleft-side LPP shortening compared with controls. These variations may be relevant to surgical planning; however, the present study did not assess surgical outcomes. Future research should determine whether such differences influence intraoperative complexity.

