<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection>
<dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:invenio="http://invenio-software.org/elements/1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:identifier>doi:10.20960/nh.03426</dc:identifier><dc:language>eng</dc:language><dc:creator>Gallego, R</dc:creator><dc:creator>Iglesia-Altaba, I</dc:creator><dc:creator>Moreno, LA</dc:creator><dc:creator>Rodriguez, G</dc:creator><dc:title>Long-term growth patterns in children born with cleft lip and/or palate. A systematic review</dc:title><dc:identifier>ART-2021-126493</dc:identifier><dc:description>Introduction: in children with cleft lip and/or palate nutritional status and growth may be impaired due to early life feeding difficulties. Objective: to review the existing literature on the nutritional prognosis during childhood of patients undergoing surgery for cleft lip and/or palate (CLP), their body composition and growth patterns from 2 to 10 years of age, and the possible effects of their early nutritional status on the long-term onset of overweight. Methods: a systematic search of growth and body composition parameters in 2-10 year-old CLP children, including cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, and using the Pubmed and Scopus databases. From the 2, 983 retrieved articles, 6 were finally included. Results: two studies out of 6 were longitudinal and the other 4 were cross-sectional, including very heterogeneous samples. Weight and height were used as growth parameters in 2 studies; 2 studies used body mass index (BMI); and the remaining 2 used indexes of nutritional status derived from anthropometric measures. The studies showed discrepancies among results: 3 of them found growth differences between children with CLP and their counterparts, whereas the other 3 did not. The two longitudinal studies did not show any significant differences between the mean BMI z-scores or growth curves of cleft patients and their counterparts. When differences existed, the most affected group was that under 5 years, syndromic children, and adopted children with CL/P. Conclusions: the literature is scarce comparing growth patterns between children with CLP and controls, and results cannot confirm that children with CLP aged 2-10 years, excluding those with syndromes or belonging to vulnerable populations, have different growth patterns or a worse nutritional status than their counterparts.</dc:description><dc:date>2021</dc:date><dc:source>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/146982</dc:source><dc:doi>10.20960/nh.03426</dc:doi><dc:identifier>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/146982</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>oai:zaguan.unizar.es:146982</dc:identifier><dc:identifier.citation>Nutricion Hospitalaria 38, 2 (2021), 410-417</dc:identifier.citation><dc:rights>by-nc-sa</dc:rights><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/es/</dc:rights><dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights></dc:dc>

</collection>