Smith Kevin S, Henry Byron T, Scott Michelle A
JW Keys Cleft and Craniofacial Clinic, A Smile for a Child Foundation, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA; MK Chapman Cleft and Craniofacial Clinic, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, USA.
University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA; Free to Smile Foundation, Columbus, OH, USA.
Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2016 May;28(2):169-76. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2016.01.003.
Over the last decade, presurgical orthopedic molding for the patient with cleft lip and palate has become much more common; it is even reasonable to assume it may be the standard of care for those wide unilateral and bilateral clefts with substantial dentofacial deformities. In 2013, there was a comparative study of nasoalveolar molding methods, comparing the Grayson-NAM device and DynaCleft. The results showed the 2 to be equivocal with both methods significantly reducing the cleft width and improving the nasal asymmetry.
在过去十年中,唇腭裂患者的术前整形外科塑形变得更加普遍;甚至可以合理地假设,对于那些伴有严重牙颌面畸形的广泛单侧和双侧腭裂患者,这可能会成为护理标准。2013年,有一项关于鼻牙槽塑形方法的比较研究,对比了格雷森鼻牙槽塑形装置(Grayson-NAM device)和动力腭裂矫治器(DynaCleft)。结果表明两者效果相当——两种方法均显著减小了腭裂宽度并改善了鼻不对称情况。