Research Article
Assessment of the Volumetric Features of Nasolacrimal Canal on Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate: A Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the differences between angle, length and volume of the nasolacrimal canal in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients.
Material and Methods: A total of 29 unilateral cleft lip and palate patients (16 female and 13 male) and 58 nasolacrimal canals were examined. Anteroposterior diameter, transverse diameter, length, angle and volume values of the nasolacrimal canal were measured and statistically compared.
Results: The mean nasolacrimal canal volume was 619.04±235.55 m3 on noncleft side and 548.63±247.99 m3 on cleft side and significant difference was found. The mean transverse diameter was 4.81±1.29 mm on noncleft side and 4.49±1.18 mm on cleft side and significant difference was found among them. There were no difference among the nasolacrimal canal length and anteroposterior diameter.
Conclusion: It can be thought that unilateral cleft lip and palate patients are more likely to have a nasolacrimal system problem on cleft side.
References
- 1. Hodges A, Goodacre T. Cleft lip and palate. Trop Doct. 2002;32:86–7.
- 2. Warren DW, Hairfield WM, Dalston ET, Sidman JD, Pillsbury HC. Effects of cleft lip and palate on the nasal airway in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114:987–92.
- 3. Groell R, Schaffler GJ, Uggowitzer M, Szolar DH, Muellner K. CT-anatomy of the nasolacrimal sac and duct. Surg Radiol Anat. 1997;19:189–91.
- 4. Little C, Mintz S, Ettinger AC. The distal lacrimal ductal system and traumatic epiphora. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;20:31–5.
- 5. Takahashi Y, Nakamura Y, Nakano T, Asamoto K, Iwaki M, Selva D, et al. The narrowest part of the bony nasolacrimal canal: an anatomical study. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;29:318–22.
- 6. Park J-H, Huh J-A, Piao J-F, Lee H, Baek S-H. Measuring nasolacrimal duct volume using computed tomography images in nasolacrimal duct obstruction patients in Korean. Int J Ophthalmol. 2019;12:100–5.
- 7. Czyz CN, Bacon TS, Stacey AW, Cahill EN, Costin BR, Karanfilov BI, et al. Nasolacrimal system aeration on computed tomographic ımaging: sex and age variation. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;32:11–6.
- 8. Okumuş Ö. Investigation of the morphometric features of bony nasolacrimal canal: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Folia Morphol. 2020;79:588–93.
- 9. Khojastepour L, Dokohaki S, Paknahad M. Are of osteomeatal complex variations related to nasolacrimal canal morphometry. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2022;34:17–26.
- 10. Villoria EM, Lenzi AR, Soares RV, Souki BQ, Sigurdsson A, Marques AP, et al. Post-processing open-source software for the CBCT monitoring of periapical lesions healing following endodontic treatment: technical report of two cases. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46:20160293.
- 11. Dos Santos Trento G, Moura LB, Spin-Neto R, Jürgens PC, Aparecida Cabrini Gabrielli M, Pereira-Filho VA. Comparison of ımaging softwares for upper airway evaluation: preliminary study. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2018;11:273–7.
- 12. Bulbul E, Yazici A, Yanik B, Yazici H, Demirpolat G. Morphometric evaluation of bony nasolacrimal canal in a caucasian population with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a multidetector computed tomography study. Korean J Radiol. 2016;17:271-6.
- 13. Whitaker LA, Katowitz JA, Randall P. The nasolacrimal apparatus in congenital facial anomalies. J Maxillofac Surg. 1974;2:59–63.
- 14. Altun O, Dedeoğlu N, Avci M. Examination of nasolacrimal duct morphometry using cone beam computed tomography in patients with unilateral cleft lip/palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28:e725–8.
- 15. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage. 2006;31:1116–28.
- 16. Shkoukani MA, Lawrence LA, Liebertz DJ, Svider PF. Cleft palate: a clinical review. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2014;102:333–42.
- 17. Akay G, Eren İ, Karadag Ö, Güngör K. Nasal septal deviation in the unilateral cleft lip and palate deformities: a three-dimensional analysis. Oral Radiology. 2021;37:567–72.
- 18. Parveen S, Husain A, Johns G, Mascarenhas R, Reddy SG. Three-dimensional analysis of craniofacial structures of ındividuals with nonsyndromic unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32:e65–9.
- 19. Shigeta K-I, Takegoshi H, Kikuchi S. Sex and age differences in the bony nasolacrimal canal: an anatomical study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125:1677–81.
- 20. Janssen AG, Mansour K, Bos JJ, Castelijns JA. Diameter of the bony lacrimal canal: normal values and values related to nasolacrimal duct obstruction: assessment with CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22:845–50.
- 21. Wang X, Zhang M, Han J, Wang H, Li S. Three-dimensional evaluation of maxillary sinus and maxilla for adolescent patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;135:110085.
Tek Taraflı Dudak ve Damak Yarıklı Hastalarda Nazolakrimal Kanalın Hacimsel Özelliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Konik Işınlı Bilgisayarlı Tomografi Çalışması
Abstract
Amaç: Bu çalışmada tek taraflı dudak ve damak yarıklı hastalarda nazolakrimal kanalın hacimleri, uzunlukları ve açıları arasındaki farkların değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Toplam 29 tek taraflı dudak ve damak yarıklı hastanın (16 kadın, 13 erkek), 58 nazolakrimal kanalı incelendi. Nazolakrimal kanalın transvers ve anteroposterior çapı, uzunluğu, açısı ve hacmi ölçüldü ve istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırıldı.
Bulgular: Yarık olmayan tarafta ortalama nazolakrimal kanal hacmi 619.04±235.55 m3 iken, yarık olan tarafta 548.63±247.99 m3 olup aralarında anlamlı bir fark bulundu. Yarık olmayan tarafta ortalama transvers çap 4,81±1,29 mm iken, yarık olan tarafta 4,49±1,18 mm olup aralarında anlamlı bir fark bulundu. Nazolakrimal kanalın uzunlukları ve anteroposterior çapları arasında fark bulunmamıştır.
Sonuç: Tek taraflı dudak ve damak yarığı olan hastalarda, yarık olan tarafta nazolakrimal sistem problemi yaşama ihtimalinin daha yüksek olduğu düşünülebilir.
References
- 1. Hodges A, Goodacre T. Cleft lip and palate. Trop Doct. 2002;32:86–7.
- 2. Warren DW, Hairfield WM, Dalston ET, Sidman JD, Pillsbury HC. Effects of cleft lip and palate on the nasal airway in children. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1988;114:987–92.
- 3. Groell R, Schaffler GJ, Uggowitzer M, Szolar DH, Muellner K. CT-anatomy of the nasolacrimal sac and duct. Surg Radiol Anat. 1997;19:189–91.
- 4. Little C, Mintz S, Ettinger AC. The distal lacrimal ductal system and traumatic epiphora. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991;20:31–5.
- 5. Takahashi Y, Nakamura Y, Nakano T, Asamoto K, Iwaki M, Selva D, et al. The narrowest part of the bony nasolacrimal canal: an anatomical study. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;29:318–22.
- 6. Park J-H, Huh J-A, Piao J-F, Lee H, Baek S-H. Measuring nasolacrimal duct volume using computed tomography images in nasolacrimal duct obstruction patients in Korean. Int J Ophthalmol. 2019;12:100–5.
- 7. Czyz CN, Bacon TS, Stacey AW, Cahill EN, Costin BR, Karanfilov BI, et al. Nasolacrimal system aeration on computed tomographic ımaging: sex and age variation. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;32:11–6.
- 8. Okumuş Ö. Investigation of the morphometric features of bony nasolacrimal canal: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Folia Morphol. 2020;79:588–93.
- 9. Khojastepour L, Dokohaki S, Paknahad M. Are of osteomeatal complex variations related to nasolacrimal canal morphometry. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2022;34:17–26.
- 10. Villoria EM, Lenzi AR, Soares RV, Souki BQ, Sigurdsson A, Marques AP, et al. Post-processing open-source software for the CBCT monitoring of periapical lesions healing following endodontic treatment: technical report of two cases. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2017;46:20160293.
- 11. Dos Santos Trento G, Moura LB, Spin-Neto R, Jürgens PC, Aparecida Cabrini Gabrielli M, Pereira-Filho VA. Comparison of ımaging softwares for upper airway evaluation: preliminary study. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2018;11:273–7.
- 12. Bulbul E, Yazici A, Yanik B, Yazici H, Demirpolat G. Morphometric evaluation of bony nasolacrimal canal in a caucasian population with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction: a multidetector computed tomography study. Korean J Radiol. 2016;17:271-6.
- 13. Whitaker LA, Katowitz JA, Randall P. The nasolacrimal apparatus in congenital facial anomalies. J Maxillofac Surg. 1974;2:59–63.
- 14. Altun O, Dedeoğlu N, Avci M. Examination of nasolacrimal duct morphometry using cone beam computed tomography in patients with unilateral cleft lip/palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28:e725–8.
- 15. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC, Smith RG, Ho S, Gee JC, et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage. 2006;31:1116–28.
- 16. Shkoukani MA, Lawrence LA, Liebertz DJ, Svider PF. Cleft palate: a clinical review. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2014;102:333–42.
- 17. Akay G, Eren İ, Karadag Ö, Güngör K. Nasal septal deviation in the unilateral cleft lip and palate deformities: a three-dimensional analysis. Oral Radiology. 2021;37:567–72.
- 18. Parveen S, Husain A, Johns G, Mascarenhas R, Reddy SG. Three-dimensional analysis of craniofacial structures of ındividuals with nonsyndromic unilateral complete cleft lip and palate. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32:e65–9.
- 19. Shigeta K-I, Takegoshi H, Kikuchi S. Sex and age differences in the bony nasolacrimal canal: an anatomical study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125:1677–81.
- 20. Janssen AG, Mansour K, Bos JJ, Castelijns JA. Diameter of the bony lacrimal canal: normal values and values related to nasolacrimal duct obstruction: assessment with CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22:845–50.
- 21. Wang X, Zhang M, Han J, Wang H, Li S. Three-dimensional evaluation of maxillary sinus and maxilla for adolescent patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate using cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;135:110085.
There are 21 citations in total.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery |
| Journal Section | RESEARCH ARTICLE |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | August 28, 2023 |
| Submission Date | June 30, 2023 |
| Acceptance Date | August 9, 2023 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2023 Volume: 5 Issue: 2 |
Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.