biostudies-literatureUnknown10(6)Stonehouse-Smith DMedical Research CouncilThis investigation received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. D.S.S. is currently funded by a Medical Research Council Clinical Research Training Fellowship (MR/X001725/1).<h4>Objectives</h4>Aberrant facial growth in individuals affected by orofacial clefts can result in maxillary retrusion and class III malocclusion, with a proportion requiring surgical correction at cessation of growth. This study aimed to evaluate occlusal and cephalometric outcomes of combined orthodontic-orthognathic treatment.<h4>Material and methods</h4>Retrospective cohort study in a United Kingdom cleft center. Participants included twenty-seven patients (20 males, 7 females) with cleft (n = 16 UCLP :7 BCLP :4 ICP) who consecutively underwent combined surgical treatment for Class III malocclusion between January 2013 and December 2017. Records were collected pre-treatment (T0), pre-surgery (T1) and at debond (T2). Models were scored using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and cephalometric radiographs were traced and analyzed. Outcomes were assessed by an independent rater.<h4>Results</h4>Mean age at surgery was 21.4 years (SD 4.9). Le Fort 1 advancement (mean 6.1 mm, SD 4.0) was performed in all cases. Additional procedures included mandibular setback (n = 2), cortico-cancellous bone grafting (n = 6) and genioplasty (n = 1). Mean T0 PAR score was 44.8 (SD 11.7), reducing to 3.6 (SD 2.0) at T2, indicating a mean % PAR score reduction of 91.6% (SD 4.7). Class III skeletal profiles improved from a mean T0 ANB of -2.1º (SD 2.2), to 2.8º (SD 1.6) at T2. Mean T0 overjet was -3.3 mm (SD 2.3), increasing to 2.6 mm (SD 1.3) at T2.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Cleft orthognathic surgery differs in complexity and approach to routine orthognathics, however, these results demonstrate that occlusal outcomes can still be comparable with non-cleft populations. Outcome data can be used for comparison with other centers providing cleft orthognathic treatment.Clinical and experimental dental researche70019https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC11534636biostudies-literatureOcclusal and Cephalometric Outcomes of Cleft Orthognathic Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.PMC11534636Bellardie HBeale VStonehouse-Smith DAbd Rahman ANAfalseOcclusal and Cephalometric Outcomes of Cleft Orthognathic Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.<h4>Objectives</h4>Aberrant facial growth in individuals affected by orofacial clefts can result in maxillary retrusion and class III malocclusion, with a proportion requiring surgical correction at cessation of growth. This study aimed to evaluate occlusal and cephalometric outcomes of combined orthodontic-orthognathic treatment.<h4>Material and methods</h4>Retrospective cohort study in a United Kingdom cleft center. Participants included twenty-seven patients (20 males, 7 females) with cleft (n = 16 UCLP :7 BCLP :4 ICP) who consecutively underwent combined surgical treatment for Class III malocclusion between January 2013 and December 2017. Records were collected pre-treatment (T0), pre-surgery (T1) and at debond (T2). Models were scored using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and cephalometric radiographs were traced and analyzed. Outcomes were assessed by an independent rater.<h4>Results</h4>Mean age at surgery was 21.4 years (SD 4.9). Le Fort 1 advancement (mean 6.1 mm, SD 4.0) was performed in all cases. Additional procedures included mandibular setback (n = 2), cortico-cancellous bone grafting (n = 6) and genioplasty (n = 1). Mean T0 PAR score was 44.8 (SD 11.7), reducing to 3.6 (SD 2.0) at T2, indicating a mean % PAR score reduction of 91.6% (SD 4.7). Class III skeletal profiles improved from a mean T0 ANB of -2.1º (SD 2.2), to 2.8º (SD 1.6) at T2. Mean T0 overjet was -3.3 mm (SD 2.3), increasing to 2.6 mm (SD 1.3) at T2.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Cleft orthognathic surgery differs in complexity and approach to routine orthognathics, however, these results demonstrate that occlusal outcomes can still be comparable with non-cleft populations. Outcome data can be used for comparison with other centers providing cleft orthognathic treatment.2024-01-01T00:00:00Z2024 Dec2026-07-09T11:41:27.601Z2025-04-04T03:05:32.013ZS-EPMC115346363949734710.1002/cre2.70019