The Brain in Oral Clefting: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses.
brain
cleft lip
cleft palate
neurodevelopment
neuroimaging
Journal
Frontiers in neuroanatomy
ISSN: 1662-5129
Titre abrégé: Front Neuroanat
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101477943
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
14
02
2022
accepted:
11
04
2022
entrez:
27
6
2022
pubmed:
28
6
2022
medline:
28
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Neuroimaging of individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts have revealed subtle brain structural differences compared to matched controls. Previous studies strongly suggest a unified primary dysfunction of normal brain and face development which could explain these neuroanatomical differences and the neuropsychiatric issues frequently observed in these individuals. Currently there are no studies that have assessed the overall empirical evidence of the association between oral clefts and brain structure. Our aim was to summarize the available evidence on potential brain structural differences in individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and their matched controls. MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Embase were systematically searched in September 2020 for case-control studies that reported structural brain MRI in individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and healthy controls. Studies of syndromic oral clefts were excluded. Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were performed in order to compare global and regional brain MRI volumes. Ten studies from 18 records were included in the review. A total of 741 participants were analyzed. A moderate to high risk of bias was determined for the included studies. The cerebellum (MD: -12.46 cm There may be structural brain differences between individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and controls based on the available evidence. Improvement in study design, size, methodology and participant selection could allow a more thorough analysis and decrease study heterogeneity.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Neuroimaging of individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts have revealed subtle brain structural differences compared to matched controls. Previous studies strongly suggest a unified primary dysfunction of normal brain and face development which could explain these neuroanatomical differences and the neuropsychiatric issues frequently observed in these individuals. Currently there are no studies that have assessed the overall empirical evidence of the association between oral clefts and brain structure. Our aim was to summarize the available evidence on potential brain structural differences in individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and their matched controls.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Embase were systematically searched in September 2020 for case-control studies that reported structural brain MRI in individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and healthy controls. Studies of syndromic oral clefts were excluded. Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were performed in order to compare global and regional brain MRI volumes.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Ten studies from 18 records were included in the review. A total of 741 participants were analyzed. A moderate to high risk of bias was determined for the included studies. The cerebellum (MD: -12.46 cm
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
There may be structural brain differences between individuals with non-syndromic oral clefts and controls based on the available evidence. Improvement in study design, size, methodology and participant selection could allow a more thorough analysis and decrease study heterogeneity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35756498
doi: 10.3389/fnana.2022.863900
pmc: PMC9226441
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
863900Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Sándor-Bajusz, Sadi, Varga, Csábi, Antonoglou and Lohner.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Semin Speech Lang. 2011 May;32(2):127-40
pubmed: 21948639
Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2010 Nov-Dec;12(6):431-2
pubmed: 21079123
Mol Cytogenet. 2016 Feb 20;9:19
pubmed: 26900403
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2003 Mar;40(2):154-7
pubmed: 12605520
Genet Med. 2002 Jan-Feb;4(1):1-9
pubmed: 11839951
Behav Brain Res. 2007 Aug 6;181(2):224-31
pubmed: 17537526
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2010 Sep;47(5):469-75
pubmed: 20180711
J Anat. 2009 Jun;214(6):926-36
pubmed: 19538636
Acta Odontol Scand. 2014 Jul;72(5):372-5
pubmed: 24255959
Zhonghua Min Guo Xiao Er Ke Yi Xue Hui Za Zhi. 1996 Jan-Feb;37(1):39-44
pubmed: 8936009
Aging (Albany NY). 2020 Jul 3;12(13):13147-13159
pubmed: 32619200
Odontology. 2020 Jan;108(1):1-15
pubmed: 31172336
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012 Mar;49(2):137-45
pubmed: 21848367
Dev Neurosci. 2014;36(6):490-8
pubmed: 25171633
J Child Neurol. 2014 Dec;29(12):1616-25
pubmed: 24381208
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Nov;122(5):1371-1382
pubmed: 18971720
Front Oral Biol. 2012;16:1-18
pubmed: 22759666
Pediatrics. 2019 Jul;144(1):
pubmed: 31189616
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1998 Mar;35(2):127-31
pubmed: 9527309
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2010 Aug;164(8):763-8
pubmed: 20679168
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021 Nov;130:379-407
pubmed: 34474050
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015 Nov 19;1:15071
pubmed: 27189754
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005 Mar;42(2):138-44
pubmed: 15748104
J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2018 Jun 05;13(4):311-318
pubmed: 31435341
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007 Apr;36(4):289-95
pubmed: 17254751
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018 Nov;57(11):876-883
pubmed: 30392629
J Neurodev Disord. 2010 Dec;2(4):235-42
pubmed: 22127933
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 Aug;161(8):753-8
pubmed: 17679656
Stat Methods Med Res. 2018 Jun;27(6):1785-1805
pubmed: 27683581
Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Jul-Dec;11(2):270-273
pubmed: 35265497
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71
pubmed: 33782057
PLoS One. 2016 May 25;11(5):e0156261
pubmed: 27223812
J Neuroimaging. 2001 Oct;11(4):418-24
pubmed: 11677883
Transl Psychiatry. 2018 Jan 10;8(1):8
pubmed: 29317601
Percept Mot Skills. 2008 Feb;106(1):197-206
pubmed: 18459368
Am J Med Genet A. 2013 May;161A(5):1002-7
pubmed: 23532928
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Dec 19;14:135
pubmed: 25524443
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2014 Sep;51(5):569-78
pubmed: 23782417
Nat Neurosci. 2015 May;18(5):773-8
pubmed: 25821911
Eur J Orthod. 2005 Jun;27(3):274-85
pubmed: 15947228
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2018 Jan;55(1):12-20
pubmed: 34162061
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10:ED000142
pubmed: 31643080
Clin Genet. 2007 Jun;71(6):511-7
pubmed: 17539900
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Nov;6(11):951-960
pubmed: 31395526
Eur Radiol. 2019 Oct;29(10):5600-5606
pubmed: 30887208
Genet Med. 2007 Apr;9(4):213-8
pubmed: 17438385
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2007 Mar;44(2):175-81
pubmed: 17328642
Pediatr Res. 2021 Jan;89(1):85-90
pubmed: 32279071
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Jan;35(1):49-60
pubmed: 31720912
Child Neuropsychol. 2021 Jan;27(1):2-16
pubmed: 32546116
Am J Med Genet A. 2005 Jul 15;136(2):158-61
pubmed: 15940700
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2000 Sep;37(5):441-6
pubmed: 11034025
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2012 Nov 15;160C(4):295-300
pubmed: 23042585
Cerebellum. 2013 Apr;12(2):236-44
pubmed: 23055082
Clin Neurophysiol. 1999 Nov;110(11):1921-6
pubmed: 10576488
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006 Oct;47(10):994-1002
pubmed: 17073978