Binderoid complete cleft lip/palate

A small subset of infants with complete cleft lip/palate look different because they have nasolabiomaxillary hypoplasia and orbital hypotelorism. The authors' purpose was to define the clinical and radiographic features of these patients and to comment on operative management, classification, and terminology. The authors reviewed 695 patients with all forms of incomplete and complete cleft lip/palate and identified 15 patients with nasolabiomaxillary hypoplasia and orbital hypotelorism. All 15 patients had complete labial clefting (5 percent of 320 patients with complete cleft lip/palate), equally divided between bilateral and unilateral forms. The female-to-male ratio was 2:1. Of the seven infants with unilateral complete cleft lip/palate, one had an intact secondary palate and all had a hypoplastic septum, small alar cartilages, narrow basilar columella, underdeveloped contralateral philtral ridge, ill-defined Cupid's bow, thin vermilion-mucosa on both sides of the cleft, and a diminutive premaxilla. Of the eight infants with bilateral complete cleft lip, one had an intact secondary palate. The features were the same as in patients with unilateral cleft, but with a more severely hypoplastic nasal tip, conical columella, tiny prolabium, underdeveloped lateral labial elements, and small/mobile premaxilla. Central midfacial hypoplasia and hypotelorism did not change during childhood and adolescence. Intermedial canthal measurements remained 1.5 SD below normal age-matched controls. Skeletal analysis (mean age, 10 years; range, 4 months to 19 years) documented maxillary retrusion (mean sagittal maxillomandibular discrepancy, 13.7 mm; range, 3 to 17 mm), absent anterior nasal spine, and a class III relationship. The mean sella nasion A point (S-N-A) angle of 74 degrees (range, 65 to 79 degrees) and sella nasion B point (S-N-B) angle of 81 degrees (range, 71 to 90 degrees) were significantly different from age-matched norms ( = 0.0007 and = 0.004, respectively). The ipsilateral central and lateral incisors were absent in all children with unilateral cleft, whereas a single-toothed premaxilla was typically found in the bilateral patients. Several modifications were necessary during primary nasolabial repair because of the diminutive bony and soft-tissue elements. All adolescent patients had Le Fort I maxillary advancement and construction of an adult nasal framework with costochondral or cranial graft. Other often-used procedures were bony augmentation of the anterior maxilla; cartilage grafts to the nasal tip and columella; and dermal grafting to the median tubercle, philtral ridge, and basal columella. Infants with complete unilateral or bilateral cleft lip/palate in association with nasolabiomaxillary hypoplasia and orbital hypotelorism do not belong on the holoprosencephalic spectrum because they have normal head circumference, stature, and intelligence, nor should they be referred to as having Binder anomaly. The authors propose the term cleft lip/palate for these children. Early recognition of this entity is important for counseling parents and because alterations in standard operative methods and orthodontic protocols are necessary.     

A comparison of the craniofacial morphology in 2-month-old unoperated infants with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate, and unilateral incomplete cleft lip.

This paper reports a cephalometric analysis of the craniofacial morphology in infants with unoperated unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCCLP) and unoperated unilateral incomplete cleft lip (UICL). The purpose of the study was to determine the nature and extent of the craniofacial deviations in UCCLP as compared to the morphology in UICL, which has previously been shown to be close to normal. The samples comprised 82 infants with UCCLP (58 males and 24 females) and 75 with UICL (48 males and 27 females). The mean age was about 2 months in both groups. The cephalometric analysis of craniofacial morphology included the lateral, frontal, and axial projections. The data were presented as mean plots of the craniofacial region including the calvaria, cranial base, orbits, nasal bone, maxilla, mandible, cervical column, pharynx, and soft-tissue profile. The most pronounced deviations in the UCCLP group were observed in the maxillary complex and the mandible. The most striking findings were: markedly increased width of the maxilla, a short mandible, and bimaxillary retrognathia except for the premaxillary area, which was relatively protruding and asymmetric. The study did not support the hypothesis previously suggested in the literature that cleft lip and palate is a craniofacial anomaly as size and shape of the calvaria and cranial base were found to be normal. The etiology of cleft lip and palate is still incompletely understood. Based on the present study, we suggest that facial type may be a liability factor that could represent a developmental threshold increasing the probability of cleft lip and palate.     

Craniofacial growth in subjects with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate, and unilateral incomplete cleft lip, from 2 to 22 months of age

This paper reports a longitudinal quantitative cephalometric analysis of the craniofacial growth in subjects with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCCLP), and unilateral incomplete cleft lip (UICL), from 2 to 22 months of age. The purpose of the study was to determine the amount and direction of growth in UCCLP compared to UICL (control group) from 2 months of age (just prior to lip repair) to 22 months of age, 20 months later. The sample comprised of 49 subjects with UCCLP (37 males and 11 females) and 45 with UICL (29 males and 16 females). The cephalometric analysis of the craniofacial morphology included lateral, frontal, and axial projections. The data were presented as mean plots of the craniofacial region including the calvaria, cranial base, orbits, nasal bone, maxilla, mandible, cervical column, pharynx, and soft-tissue profile. A valid common coordinate system (registration according to the n-s line in the lateral projection, latero-orbitale line in the frontal projection, and meatus acusticus externus line in the axial projection for the landmark positions at examination 1 and 2) was ascertained. The growth at a specific anatomical location in a patient was defined as the displacement vector from the coordinate of the corresponding landmark in the X-ray at examination 1 to its coordinate at examination 2, corrected for X-ray magnification. The growth of an anatomical region in a patient was assessed by investigating the growth pattern formed by a collection of individual growth vectors in that region. The amount of growth in the UCCLP and UICL group was very similar. The general craniofacial growth pattern, in terms of the direction of growth, was also fairly similar in the UCCLP group and the control group. However, the maxilla and mandible showed a more vertical growth pattern than that observed in the control group. This study confirms that UCCLP is a localized deviation, and not a craniofacial anomaly, due to the fact that a normal growth potential has been observed in all craniofacial regions, except where the growth had been directly influenced by surgical intervention. Furthermore, the vertical growth pattern of the maxilla and mandible supports the hypothesis of a special facial type in cleft lip and palate individuals, and the facial type as a liability factor increasing the probability of cleft lip and palate.     

Familial recurrence-pattern analysis of cleft lip with or without cleft palate.

Cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P) is a common congenital malformation with an incidence in European white populations of about 1/1,000. The familial clustering of CL/P has been extensively characterized, and epidemiological studies have proposed monogenic models (with reduced penetrance), multifactorial/threshold models, and mixed major-gene/multifactorial models to explain its inheritance. The recognition of an association between two RFLPs at the transforming growth factor alpha (TGFA) locus and CL/P supports a major-gene component to the etiology of CL/P. Risch has shown that the recurrence risk ratio lambda R (risk to relatives, vs. population prevalence) is a useful pointer to the mode of inheritance. Here we further develop the use of lambda R to analyze recurrence-risk data for CL/P. Recurrence risks for first-, second-, and third-degree relatives equate well with oligogenic models with as few as four loci. A monogenic/additive model is strongly rejected. The limited available twin data are also consistent with this model. A "major gene" interacting epistatically with an oligogenic background is shown to be a plausible alternative. Power calculations for a linkage study to map the CL/P major-risk locus suggest that a sample of 50 affected sib pairs will be adequate, but linkage to minor-risk loci will require very much larger samples.     

Genetics of cleft lip and cleft palate in China.

During the past 10 years, 60 cases of cleft lip with or without cleft palate [CL(P)] were recorded among 45,072 newborns at Shanghai International Peace Maternity and Infant Hospital, China. The incidence was 1.33 per 1,000 births. The family histories of 163 CL(P) patients were analyzed. The incidences of CL(P) in the first-, second-, and third-degree relatives of CL(P) patients were 11/246 (4.47%), 10/1,032 (0.97%), and 6/1,727 (0.35%), respectively. Of the 163 probands, three had a history of consanguinity of the parents (1.8%), in contrast to 0.77% in the general population. These data are suggestive of multifactorial inheritance. The heritability of CL(P) in our study calculated by Falconer's formula was 77.6%.     

Mouse genetic models of cleft lip with or without cleft palate

Nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate (CLP) is among the most common human birth defects. Transmission patterns suggest that the causes are "multifactorial" combinations of genetic and nongenetic factors, mostly distinct from those causing cleft secondary palate (CP). The major etiological factors are largely unknown, and the embryological mechanisms are not well understood. In contrast to CP or neural tube defects (NTD), CLP is uncommon in mouse mutants. Fourteen known mutants or strains express CLP, often as part of a severe syndrome, whereas nonsyndromic CLP is found in two conditional mutants and in two multifactorial models based on a hypomorphic variant with an epigenetic factor. This pattern suggests that human nonsyndromic CLP is likely caused by regulatory and hypomorphic gene variants, and may also involve epigenetics. The developmental pathogenic mechanism varies among mutants and includes deficiencies of growth of the medial, lateral or maxillary facial prominences, defects in the fusion process itself, and shifted midline position of the medial prominences. Several CLP mutants also have NTD, suggesting potential genetic overlap of the traits in humans. The mutants may reflect two interacting sets of genetic signaling pathways: Bmp4, Bmpr1a, Sp8, and Wnt9b may be in one set, and Tcfap2a and Sox11 may be in another. Combining the results of chromosomal linkage studies of unidentified human CLP genes with insights from the mouse models, the following previously unexamined genes are identified as strong candidate genes for causative roles in human nonsyndromic CLP: BMP4, BMPR1B, TFAP2A, SOX4, WNT9B, WNT3, and SP8.     

Maternal effects in human cleft lip and palate.

To look for a persistent maternal effect of CL(P) and CP, 8,000 pedigrees were screened for half sibships, and data were pooled from 16 investigators. After excluding known genetic or cytogenetic diagnoses from the probands with facial clefts, a recurrence risk of .011 was obtained for CL(P) based upon 342 maternal half sibs. This was nearly identical to the risk of .014 based upon 210 paternal half sibs. CP proband frequencies of .004 for maternal half sibs and .009 for the paternal counterparts were also found. The lack of significant maternal effects in this data supports previously reported data from twin studies and from interracial crosses from Hawaii. The lack of maternal effect in human CL(P) and CP is in contrast to genetic data on clefting in mice.