English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  It has been hypothesized that prematurity and adjunctive neonatal care is 'a priori' a risk for disturbances of palatal and orofacial development which increases the need for later orthodontic or orthognathic treatment. As results on late consequences of prematurity are consistently contradictory, the necessity exists for a fundamental analysis of existing methodologies, confounding factors, and outcomes of studies on palatal development in preterm and low birthweight infants.    Method  A search of the literature was conducted based on Cochrane search strategies including sources in English, German, and French. Original data were recalculated from studies which primarily dealt with both preterm and term infants. The extracted data, especially those from non-English paper sources, were provided unfiltered in tables for comparison (Parts 1 and 2).    Results  Morphology assessment of the infant palate is subject to non-standardized visual and metrical measurements. Most methodologies are inadequate for measuring a three-dimensional shape. Several confounding factors were identified as causes contributing to disturbances of palatal and orofacial development.    Conclusion  Taking into account the abovementioned shortcomings, the following conclusions may be drawn for practitioners and prospective investigators of clinical studies. 1) The lack of uniformity in the anatomical nomenclature of the infant's palate underlines the need for a uniform definition. 2) Metrically, non-intubated preterm infants do not exhibit different palatal width or height compared to matched term infants up to the corrected age of three months. Beyond that age, no data on the subject are currently available. 3) Oral intubation does not invariably alter palatal morphology of preterm and low birthweight infants. 4) The findings on palatal grooving, height, and asymmetry as a consequence of orotracheal intubation up to the age of 11 years are inconsistent. 5) Metrically, the palates of orally intubated infants remain narrower posteriorly, beginning at the second deciduous molar, until the age of 11 years. Beyond that age, no data on the subject are currently available. 6) There is a definite need for further, especially metrical, longitudinal and controlled trials on palatal morphology of preterm and low birthweight infants with reliable measuring techniques. 7) None of the raised confounding factors for developmental disturbances may be excluded until evident results are presented. Thus, early orthodontic and logopedic control of formerly premature infants is recommended up to the late mixed dentition stage.

Palatal development of preterm and low birthweight infants compared to term infants – What do we know? Part 3: Discussion and Conclusion