• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

鼻牙槽塑形方法的比较研究:鼻提升器联合DynaCleft®与完全性单侧唇腭裂患者的NAM - Grayson法对比

Comparative study of nasoalveolar molding methods: nasal elevator plus DynaCleft® versus NAM-Grayson in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate.

作者信息

Monasterio Luis, Ford Alison, Gutiérrez Carolina, Tastets María Eugenia, García Jacqueline

出版信息

Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013 Sep;50(5):548-54. doi: 10.1597/11-245. Epub 2012 Aug 20.

DOI:10.1597/11-245
PMID:22906392
Abstract

Objective : To compare nasoalveolar molding (NAM) effect employing a nasal elevator plus DynaCleft® and NAM-Grayson system in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Method : Prospective study in two groups. Group A included 20 consecutive patients treated with DynaCleft® and a nasal elevator before lip surgery. Group B included 20 patients treated with NAM-Grayson system. Maxillary casts and standard view photographs were done before and after treatment. Columella deviation angle, soft tissue distance of the cleft, intercommisural distance, and nostril height and width were traced and measured on the printed photos; a ratio was obtained and compared before and after treatment. Cleft width, anterior width, and anteroposterior distances were measured on the maxillary cast. Results : Group A began treatment at an average age of 14.3 days and group B at an average age of 16.9 days; no complications were observed. For group A, the initial average alveolar cleft within the cast was 10.7 mm, and after treatment it was 6.6 mm. For group B, pretreatment width was 11.2 mm, and after treatment it was 5.9 mm. No differences were found on the anterior and posterior width, and A-P distance of both groups. The initial mean columellar angle in group A was 38.1°, and after treatment it was 61.5°; for group B the initial mean columellar angle was 33.6°, and after treatment it was 59.5°. Results of Mann-Whitney U and Student's t tests showed no differences (P > .05). Width and height dimensions of the nostril showed minor differences. Conclusions : Both methods significantly reduced the cleft width and improved the nasal asymmetry. Our findings show that both methods produced similar results.

摘要

目的

比较使用鼻提升器加DynaCleft®和NAM - Grayson系统对完全性单侧唇腭裂患者进行鼻牙槽塑形(NAM)的效果。方法:两组的前瞻性研究。A组包括20例在唇裂手术前使用DynaCleft®和鼻提升器治疗的连续患者。B组包括20例使用NAM - Grayson系统治疗的患者。在治疗前后制作上颌模型并拍摄标准视图照片。在打印照片上追踪并测量鼻小柱偏斜角度、裂隙软组织距离、口角间距离以及鼻孔高度和宽度;获得一个比值并在治疗前后进行比较。在上颌模型上测量裂隙宽度、前部宽度和前后距离。结果:A组平均在14.3天开始治疗,B组平均在16.9天开始治疗;未观察到并发症。对于A组,模型内初始平均牙槽裂隙为10.7毫米,治疗后为6.6毫米。对于B组,治疗前宽度为11.2毫米,治疗后为5.9毫米。两组的前部和后部宽度以及前后距离没有差异。A组初始平均鼻小柱角度为38.1°,治疗后为61.5°;B组初始平均鼻小柱角度为33.6°,治疗后为59.5°。曼 - 惠特尼U检验和学生t检验结果显示无差异(P> .05)。鼻孔的宽度和高度尺寸显示出微小差异。结论:两种方法均显著减小了裂隙宽度并改善了鼻不对称。我们的研究结果表明两种方法产生了相似的结果。

相似文献

1
Comparative study of nasoalveolar molding methods: nasal elevator plus DynaCleft® versus NAM-Grayson in patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate.鼻牙槽塑形方法的比较研究:鼻提升器联合DynaCleft®与完全性单侧唇腭裂患者的NAM - Grayson法对比
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2013 Sep;50(5):548-54. doi: 10.1597/11-245. Epub 2012 Aug 20.
2
Nasoalveolar Molding Therapy for the Treatment of Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Improves Nasal Symmetry and Maxillary Alveolar Dimensions.鼻牙槽塑形治疗单侧唇腭裂可改善鼻对称性和上颌牙槽尺寸。
J Craniofac Surg. 2016 Nov;27(8):1978-1982. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000003047.
3
Comparative Study of Presurgical Infant Orthopedics by Modified Grayson Method and Dynacleft With Nasal Elevators in Patients With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate-A Clinical Prospective Study.改良格雷森法与带鼻提升器的Dynacleft在单侧唇腭裂患儿术前正畸中的比较研究——一项临床前瞻性研究
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2021 Feb;58(2):189-201. doi: 10.1177/1055665620948630. Epub 2020 Aug 25.
4
Short-Term Efficacy of Presurgical Vacuum Formed Nasoalveolar Molding Aligners on Nose, Lip, and Maxillary Arch Morphology in Infants With Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Prospective Clinical Trial.单侧唇腭裂婴儿术前真空成型鼻牙槽矫正器对鼻、唇和上颌弓形态的短期疗效:一项前瞻性临床试验。
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2021 Jul;58(7):815-823. doi: 10.1177/1055665620966189. Epub 2020 Oct 27.
5
Presurgical presentation of columellar features, nostril anatomy, and alveolar alignment in bilateral cleft lip and palate after infant orthopedics with and without nasoalveolar molding.在接受或未接受鼻牙槽塑形的婴儿期正畸治疗后,双侧唇腭裂患者的鼻小柱特征、鼻孔解剖结构和牙槽排列的术前表现。
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012 May;49(3):314-24. doi: 10.1597/10-204. Epub 2011 Oct 7.
6
Quantitative Evaluation of Nasolabial Alterations following Nasoalveolar Molding (NAM) Therapy in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip.单侧唇裂患者鼻牙槽塑形(NAM)治疗后鼻唇改变的定量评估
Facial Plast Surg. 2019 Feb;35(1):73-77. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1675633. Epub 2018 Dec 26.
7
Nasoalveolar molding in complete cleft lip nasal deformity patients.完全性唇裂鼻畸形患者的鼻牙槽塑形
Bratisl Lek Listy. 2012;113(5):293-7. doi: 10.4149/bll_2012_068.
8
The nasoalveolar molding technique versus DynaCleft nasal elevator application in infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate.鼻牙槽塑形技术与DynaCleft鼻提升器在单侧唇腭裂婴儿中的应用对比
Arch Craniofac Surg. 2024 Jun;25(3):123-132. doi: 10.7181/acfs.2024.00129. Epub 2024 Jun 20.
9
Comparative outcomes of two nasoalveolar molding techniques for bilateral cleft nose deformity.两种用于双侧唇裂鼻畸形的鼻牙槽塑形技术的比较结果。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 Jan;133(1):103-110. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000436827.95321.f2.
10
Comparative outcomes of two nasoalveolar molding techniques for unilateral cleft nose deformity.两种用于单侧唇裂鼻畸形的鼻牙槽塑形技术的比较结果。
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Dec;130(6):1289-1295. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31826d16f3.

引用本文的文献

1
A survey on nasoalveolar moulding treatment practices at cleft centres across India.一项关于印度各地腭裂治疗中心鼻牙槽塑形治疗实践的调查。
Front Surg. 2025 Mar 5;12:1526364. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1526364. eCollection 2025.
2
Cleft Palate and Presurgical Orthopedics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Intra-Arch Dimensions During the First Year of Life.腭裂与术前正畸学:生命第一年牙弓内尺寸的系统评价与荟萃分析
J Pers Med. 2024 Nov 29;14(12):1127. doi: 10.3390/jpm14121127.
3
The nasoalveolar molding technique versus DynaCleft nasal elevator application in infants with unilateral cleft lip and palate.
鼻牙槽塑形技术与DynaCleft鼻提升器在单侧唇腭裂婴儿中的应用对比
Arch Craniofac Surg. 2024 Jun;25(3):123-132. doi: 10.7181/acfs.2024.00129. Epub 2024 Jun 20.
4
[Pre-surgical orthopedic treatment with Hinostroza nasal retractor modification in complete unilateral palate fissure. Case report].[完全性单侧腭裂患者使用改良希诺斯特罗扎鼻牵开器的术前骨科治疗。病例报告]
Rev Cient Odontol (Lima). 2021 Jun 21;9(2):e065. doi: 10.21142/2523-2754-0902-2021-065. eCollection 2021 Apr-Jun.
5
Outcomes of Presurgical Nasoalveolar Molding using Modified Nostril Retainers in Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate at an Average Follow-up of 2 Years.使用改良鼻孔保持器对单侧唇腭裂患者进行术前鼻牙槽塑形的效果:平均2年随访结果
Turk J Orthod. 2023 Dec 29;36(4):254-260. doi: 10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2023.2022.98.
6
Dynamic Molding of Cleft Nasal Cartilage in Unilateral Complete Cleft Lip and Palate Using Simple Segmented NAM.使用简单分段式鼻牙槽骨塑形器对单侧完全性唇腭裂鼻软骨进行动态塑形
J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2023 Dec;22(4):946-953. doi: 10.1007/s12663-023-01980-x. Epub 2023 Aug 10.
7
Schematic Treatment Tree for the Presurgical Nasoalveolar Moulding of Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate.唇腭裂患者术前鼻牙槽塑形的示意性治疗流程
J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2023 Dec;22(4):954-960. doi: 10.1007/s12663-023-01993-6. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
8
Advances in Cleft Lip and Palate Surgery.《唇腭裂手术进展》
Medicina (Kaunas). 2023 Nov 1;59(11):1932. doi: 10.3390/medicina59111932.
9
A modified presurgical alveolar molding technique for treatment of cleft in Down syndrome.一种改良的术前牙槽骨塑形技术用于治疗唐氏综合征患者的腭裂。
Korean J Orthod. 2021 Nov 25;51(6):428-434. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2021.51.6.428.
10
Nasal molding prevents relapse of nasal deformity after primary rhinoplasty in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip: An outcomes-based comparative study of palatal plate alone versus nasoalveolar molding.鼻骨成型术预防单侧完全性唇裂患者初次鼻整形术后鼻畸形复发:单独腭托与鼻牙槽塑形的基于结局的对比研究。
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2022 Feb;8(1):197-208. doi: 10.1002/cre2.502. Epub 2021 Oct 24.