Comparison of two scoring systems for evaluation of treatment outcome in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate

Objective : To compare two scoring systems: the Huddart/Bodenham system (HB system) and the Bauru-BCLP yardstick (BCLP yardstick), which classify treatment outcome in terms of dental arch relationships in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (CBCLP). The predictive value of these scoring systems for treatment outcome was also evaluated. Design : Retrospective longitudinal study. Patients : Dental arch relationships of 43 CBCLP patients were evaluated at 6, 9, and 12 years. Setting : Treatment outcome in BCLP patients using two scoring systems. Main Outcome Measures : For each age group, the HB scores were correlated with the BCLP yardstick scores using Spearman's correlation coefficient. The predictive value of the two scoring systems was evaluated by backward regression analysis. Results : Intraobserver Kappa values for the BCLP yardstick scoring for the two observers were .506 and .627, respectively, and the interobserver reliability ranged from .427 and .581. The intraobserver reliability for the HB system ranged from .92 to .97 and the interobserver reliability from .88 to .96. The BCLP yardstick scores of 6 and 9 years together were predictors for the outcome at 12 years (explained variance 41.3%). Adding the incisor and lateral HB scores in the regression model increased the explained variance to 67%. Conclusions : The BCLP yardstick and the HB system are reliable scoring systems for evaluation of dental arch relationships of CBCLP patients. The HB system categorizes treatment outcome into similar categories as the BCLP yardstick. In case a more sensitive measure of treatment outcome is needed, selectively both scoring systems should be used.

Statistical model-based segmentation of the proximal femur in digital antero-posterior (AP) pelvic radiographs.

PURPOSE    Segmentation of the proximal femur in digital antero-posterior (AP) pelvic radiographs is required to create a three-dimensional model of the hip joint for use in planning and treatment. However, manually extracting the femoral contour is tedious and prone to subjective bias, while automatic segmentation must accommodate poor image quality, anatomical structure overlap, and femur deformity. A new method was developed for femur segmentation in AP pelvic radiographs. METHODS    Using manual annotations on 100 AP pelvic radiographs, a statistical shape model (SSM) and a statistical appearance model (SAM) of the femur contour were constructed. The SSM and SAM were used to segment new AP pelvic radiographs with a three-stage approach. At initialization, the mean SSM model is coarsely registered to the femur in the AP radiograph through a scaled rigid registration. Mahalanobis distance defined on the SAM is employed as the search criteria for each annotated suggested landmark location. Dynamic programming was used to eliminate ambiguities. After all landmarks are assigned, a regularized non-rigid registration method deforms the current mean shape of SSM to produce a new segmentation of proximal femur. The second and third stages are iteratively executed to convergence. RESULTS    A set of 100 clinical AP pelvic radiographs (not used for training) were evaluated. The mean segmentation error was [Formula: see text], requiring [Formula: see text] s per case when implemented with Matlab. The influence of the initialization on segmentation results was tested by six clinicians, demonstrating no significance difference. CONCLUSIONS    A fast, robust and accurate method for femur segmentation in digital AP pelvic radiographs was developed by combining SSM and SAM with dynamic programming. This method can be extended to segmentation of other bony structures such as the pelvis.

Facial attractiveness of patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate and of controls assessed by laypersons and professionals.

OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to identify differences in the aesthetic evaluation of profile and frontal photographs of (1) patients treated for complete left-sided cleft lip and palate and (2) control patients by laypeople and professionals. MATERIALS, SUBJECTS, AND METHODS Left-side profile and frontal photographs of 20 adult patients treated for complete left-sided cleft lip and palate (10 men, 10 women, mean age: 20.5 years) and of 10 control patients with a class I occlusion (five men, five women, mean age: 22.1 years) were included in the study. The post-treatment photographs were evaluated by 15 adult laypeople, 14 orthodontists, and 10 maxillofacial surgeons. Each photograph was judged on a modified visual analogue scale (VA S, 0-10; 0 'very unattractive' to 10 'very attractive'). A four-level mixed model was fitted in which the VA S score was the dependent variable; cases, profession, view, and rater were independent variables. RESULTS Compared with laypersons, orthodontists gave higher VA S scores (+0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.53, 0.84]; P < 0.001), followed by surgeons (+0.21, 95% CI [0.03, 0.38], P = 0.02). Controls were given significantly higher scores than patients with clefts for profile and frontal photographs (+1.97, 95% CI [1.60; 2.35], P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between the scores for the frontal and lateral views (P = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS All the different rater panels were less satisfied with the facial aesthetics of patients with clefts compared with that of control patients. Further research should evaluate whether these findings correlate with patients' self-perception and to what extent it affects the patients' psychosocial well-being.

One-stage (Warsaw) and two-stage (Oslo) repair of unilateral cleft lip and palate: Craniofacial outcomes

The aim of this study was to compare facial development in subjects with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (CUCLP) treated with two different surgical protocols. Lateral cephalometric radiographs of 61 patients (42 boys, 19 girls; mean age, 10.9 years; SD, 1) treated consecutively in Warsaw with one-stage repair and 61 age-matched and sex-matched patients treated in Oslo with two-stage surgery were selected to evaluate craniofacial morphology. On each radiograph 13 angular and two ratio variables were measured in order to describe hard and soft tissues of the facial region. The analysis showed that differences between the groups were limited to hard tissues – the maxillary prominence in subjects from the Warsaw group was decreased by almost 4° in comparison with the Oslo group (sella-nasion-A-point (SNA) = 75.3° and 79.1°, respectively) and maxillo-mandibular morphology was less favorable in the Warsaw group than the Oslo group (ANB angle = 0.8° and 2.8°, respectively). The soft tissue contour was comparable in both groups. In conclusion, inter-group differences suggest a more favorable outcome in the Oslo group. However, the distinctiveness of facial morphology in background populations (ie, in Poles and Norwegians) could have contributed to the observed results.