Shape changes in the cleft palate maxilla: A longitudinal study

Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 292-303

  Lestrel, Pete E ^a,d   Berkowitz, Samuel ^b   Takahashi, Osamu ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI MILLER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c NIHON UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cleft palate; Elliptical Fourier functions; Growth; Maxilla; Shape

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BONE DEVELOPMENT; BONE GROWTH; CLEFT LIP; CLEFT PALATE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIP RECONSTRUCTION; MALE; MAXILLA; MEASUREMENT; PALATOPLASTY; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGING; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CLEFT PALATE; FEMALE; FOURIER ANALYSIS; HUMANS; INFANT; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MAXILLA; SEX CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 0033009110     PISSN: 10556656     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1597/1545-1569(1999)036<0292:SCITCP>2.3.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Berkowitz S. Stereophotogrammetric analysis of casts of normal and abnormal palates. Am J Orthod 1971;60:1-18.
2. Berkowitz S. Cleft Lip and Palate. San Diego: Singular Press; 1997.
3. Berkowitz S, Krischer J, Pruzansky S. Quantitative analysis of cleft palate casts. Cleft Palate J 1974;11:134-160.
4. Berkowitz S, Pruzansky S. Stereophotogrammetry of serial casts of cleft palate. Angle Orthod 1968;38:136-149.
5. Bishara SE, Martinez RS, Patron VH. Dentofacial relationships in persons with unoperated clefts: comparisons between three cleft types. Am J Orthod 1985;88:481-507.
6. Blum H. A transformation for extracting new descriptors of shape. In: Wathen-Dunn W. ed. Models for the Perception of Speech and Visual Form. Cambridge: MIT Press: 1967.
7. Blum H. Biological shape and visual science. J Theor Biol 1973;38:205-287.
8. Bookstein FL. The Measurement of Biological Shape and Shape Change. Lecture Notes in Biomathematics. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1978;24:1-191.
9. Bookstein FL. On the cephalometrics of skeletal change. Am J Orthod 1982;82: 177-182.
10. Bookstein FL. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
11. Cheverud JM, Richtsmeier JT. Finite-element scaling applied to sexual dimorphism in rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) facial growth. Syst Zool 1986;35:381-399.
12. Delfino VP, Colonna M, Vacca E, Potente F, Introna J. Computer-aided skull/ face superimposition. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 1986;7:201-212.
13. Diaz G, Quacci D, Dell'Orbo C. Recognition of cell surface modulation by elliptic Fourier analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 1990;31:57-62.
14. Ferson S, Rohlf FJ, Koehn RK. Measuring shape variation of two-dimensional outlines. Syst Zool 1985;43:59-68.
15. Heidbuchel KLWM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Maxillary and mandibular dental-arch dimensions and occlusion in bilateral cleft lip and palate patients from 3 to 17 years of age. Cleft Palate J 1997;34:21-26.
16. Inoue M. Fourier analysis of the forehead shape of skull and sex determination by use of the computer. Forensic Sci Int 1990;47:101-112.
17. Johnson DR. Shape of vertebrae - an application of a generalized method. In: Dixon AD, Sarnat BG, eds. Normal and Abnormal Bone Growth: Basic and Clincial Research. New York: Alan R. Liss; 1985.
18. Jonsson G, Thilander B. Occlusion, arch dimensions, and craniofacial morphology after palatal surgery in a group of children with clefts in the secondary palate. Am J Orthod 1976;76:243-255.
19. Kilpeläinen PVJ, Laine-Alava MT, Lammi S. Palatal morphology and type of clefting. Cleft Palate J 1996;33:477-482.
20. Klecka WR. Discriminant Analysis. Quat. Appl. Soc. Sci. Ser. 19. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1980.
21. Kuhl FP, Giardina CR. Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Comput Graphics Imaging Proc 1982;18:236-258.
22. Lele S. Euclidean distance matrix analysis (EDMA): estimation of mean form and mean form difference. Math Geol 1993;25:573-602.
23. Lele S, Richtsmeier JT. Euclidean distance matrix analysis: a coordinate free approach for comparing biological shapes using landmark data. Am J Phys Anthropol 1991;86:415-427.
24. Lele S, Richtsmeier JT. On comparing biological shapes: detection of influential landmarks. Am J Phys Anthropol 1992;87:49-66.
25. Lestrel PE. Some problems in the assessment of morphological size and shape differences. Yearb Phys Anthropol 1974;18:140-162.
26. Lestrel PE. A quantitative approach to skeletal morphology: Fourier analysis. SPIE 1980;166:80-93.
27. Lestrel PE. A Fourier analytic procedure to describe complex morphological shapes. In: Dixon AD, Sarnat BG, eds. Factors and Mechanisms Influencing Bone Growth. New York: Alan R. Liss; 1982.
28. Lestrel PE. Method for analyzing complex two-dimensional forms: elliptical Fourier functions. Am J Hum Biol 1989a;1:149-164.
29. Lestrel PE. Some approaches toward the mathematical modeling of the cranio-facial complex. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol 1989b;9:77-91.
30. Lestrel PE. Introduction and overview of Fourier descriptors. In: Lestrel PE, ed. Fourier Descriptors and Their Applications in Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997a.
31. Lestrel PE. Morphometrics of craniofacial form. In: Dixon AD, Hoyte DAN, Rönning O, eds. Fundamentals of Craniofacial Growth. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1997b.
32. Lestrel PE, Engstrom C, Chaconas SJ, Bodt A. A longitudinal study of the human nasal bone in Norma lateralis: size and shape considerations. In: Dixon AD, Sarnat BG, Hoyle DAN. eds. Fundamentals of Bone Growth: Methodology and Applications. Boca Raton. FL: CRC Press; 1991.
33. Lestrel PE, Kerr WJS. Quantification of functional regulator therapy using elliptical Fourier functions. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:481-491.
34. Lohmann GP. Eigenshape analysis of microfossils: a general morphometric procedure for describing changes in shape. Math Geol 1983;15:659-672.
35. Lohmann GP, Schweitzer PN. On eigenshape analysis. In: Rohlf FJ, Bookstein FL, eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometric Workshop. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Special Publ. 2; 1990.
36. Lubischew AA. On the use of discriminant functions in taxonomy. Biometrics 1962;18:455-477.
37. Mølsted K, Dahl E. Asymmetry of the palate in children with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate J 1990;27:184-192.
38. Ray TS. Application of eigenshape analysis to second order leaf shape ontogeny in Syngonium podophyllum (Araceae). In: Rohlf FJ. Bookstein FL, eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometric Workshop. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Special Publ. 2; 1990.
39. Read DW. From multivariate to qualitative measurement: representation of shape. Hum Evol 1990;5:417-429.
40. Read DW, Lestrel PE. A comment upon the uses of homologous-point measures in systematics: a reply to Bookstein et al. Syst Zool 1986;33:241-253.
41. Richtsmeier JT. Cranial growth in Apert's syndrome as measured by finite element scaling analysis. Acta Anat 1988;133:50-56.
42. Rohlf FJ, Archie JW. A comparison of Fourier methods for the description of wing shape in mosquitos (Diptera: Culicidae). Syst Zool 1984;33:302-317.
43. Straney DO. Median axis methods in morphometrics. In: Rohlf FJ. Bookstein FL, eds. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometric Workshop. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Special Publ. 2; 1990.