This meta-analysis aimed to compare Marfan syndrome (MFS) patients with non-MFS populations based on orofacial health status to combine publicly available scientific information while also improving the validity of primary study findings. A comprehensive search was performed in the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science, for articles published between 1 January 2000 and 17 February 2022. PRISMA guidelines were followed to carry out this systematic review. We used the PECO system to classify people with MFS based on whether or not they had distinctive oral health characteristics compared to the non-MFS population. The following are some examples of how PECO is used: P denotes someone who has MFS; E stands for a medical or genetic assessment of MFS; C stands for people who do not have MFS; and O stands for the orofacial characteristics of MFS. Using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, independent reviewers assessed the articles' methodological quality and extracted data. Four case-control studies were analyzed for meta-analysis. Due to the wide range of variability, we were only able to include data from at least three previous studies. There was a statistically significant difference in bleeding on probing and pocket depth between MFS and non-MFS subjects. MFS patients are more prone to periodontal tissue inflammation due to the activity of FBN1 and MMPs. Early orthodontic treatment is beneficial for the correction of a narrow upper jaw and a high palate, as well as a skeletal class II with retrognathism of the lower jaw and crowding of teeth.
Presurgical orthopaedics has been employed since the 1950s as an adjunctive neonatal therapy for the correction of cleft lip and palate. It is accepted that presurgical orthopaedic plates facilitate lip repair and balanced orofacial growth.
The results of speech, language and hearing assessment of repaired cleft palate children and adults over a 4-year period at the Speech/Language therapy unit, Department of ENT, Faculty of Medicine, UKM are reported. The subjects were 33 incomplete cleft lip palate (ICLP), 48 unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and 26 bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP). Results obtained for the following assessments are reported and discussed: (i) Hearing assessment, (ii) intelligibility rate, (iii) severity of hyper-nasality and (iv) types of articulation errors and school/behaviour problems and nasal grimace. Due to subject variability in ethnicity, language and dialects and the lack of normal data, it is difficult to compare or repeat previously reported results. Assessment of intelligibility, hypernasality and articulation were conducted using the Malay language. Results obtained were compared among the three groups of subjects. The significant findings were that hypernasality, intelligibility and articulation errors were more severe in the ICLP group than in the UCLP or BCLP groups of patients. This is contrary to expectations and cannot be explained in terms of the type and/or the degree of clefting. Hence, special attention should be paid to the less overt type of cleft patients in so far as their speech assessment and rehabilitation are concerned.
This study was done to determine the prevalence of dental anomalies and facial profile abnormality and its association with the non-syndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) as compared to the non-cleft children. A comparative cross sectional study was conducted where the case group consist of 98 non-syndromic CLP children-unilateral (UCLP) and bilateral (BCLP) who attended the Combined Clinic at Kota Bharu Dental Clinic (KBDC) while the comparison group comprised of 109 non-cleft children who attended the outpatient clinic at KBDC. Their ages were between 3 to 12 years old. Clinical oral and facial profile examinations were carried out to look for dental anomalies (morphology, number and alignment of teeth) and facial profile abnormality. The prevalence of anomalies in morphology of teeth in CLP (24.5%) and non-cleft (10.1%), number of teeth in CLP (44.9%) and non-cleft (7.3%), mal-alignment in CLP (79.6%) and non-cleft (27.5%) and facial profile abnormality in CLP (26.5%) and non-cleft (9.1 %). There was a significant association between CLP and anomalies in morphology, number, mal-alignment and abnormality in facial profile; (p < 0.05). Therefore, there was a high prevalence and risk of dental anomalies and facial profile abnormality in the CLP children compared to the non-cleft children.