Long-Term Characterization of Cranial Defects After Surgical Correction for Single-Suture Craniosynostosis.
Bone Transplantation
/ methods
Cohort Studies
Craniosynostoses
/ diagnostic imaging
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Infant
Male
Monitoring, Physiologic
/ methods
Monte Carlo Method
Postoperative Complications
/ physiopathology
Plastic Surgery Procedures
/ methods
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Skull
/ physiopathology
Time Factors
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
/ methods
Treatment Outcome
Journal
Annals of plastic surgery
ISSN: 1536-3708
Titre abrégé: Ann Plast Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7805336
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
entrez:
15
5
2019
pubmed:
15
5
2019
medline:
5
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Craniosynostosis is typically corrected surgically within the first year of life through cranial vault reconstruction. These procedures often leave open calvarial defects at the time of surgery, which are anticipated to close over time in a large proportion of cases. However, residual calvarial defects may result as long-term sequelae from cranial vault remodeling. When larger defects are present, they may necessitate further reconstruction for closure.Better understanding of the calvarial osseous healing process may help to identify which defects will resolve or shrink to acceptable size and which will require further surgery. Our study aims to assess the long-term changes in defect size after cranial vault reconstruction for craniosynostosis. One-year postoperative and long-term computed tomography scans were retrieved from the craniofacial anomalies archive. Analysis used custom software. All defects above the size of 1 cm were analyzed and tracked for calvarial location, surface area, and circularity. Monte Carlo simulation was performed to model the effect of initial defect size on the rate of defect closure. We analyzed a total of 74 defects. The mean ± SD initial defect surface area was 3.27 ± 3.40 cm. The mean ± SD final defect surface area was 1.71 ± 2.54 cm. The mean ± SD percent decrease was 55.06% ± 28.99%. There was a significant difference in the percentage decrease of defects in the parietal and frontoparietal locations: 68.4% and 43.7%, respectively (P = 0.001). Monte Carlo simulation results suggest that less than 10% of defects above the size of 9 cm will close to the size of 2.5 cm or less. We describe and make available a novel validated method of measuring cranial defects. We find that the large majority of initial defects greater than 9 cm remain at least 1 in in size (2.5 cm) 1 year postoperatively. In addition, there appear to be regional differences in closure rates across the cranium, with frontoparietal defects closing more slowly than those in the parietal region. This information will aid surgeons in the decision-making process regarding cranioplasty after craniosynostosis correction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31082848
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001906
pii: 00000637-201906000-00018
pmc: PMC6519078
mid: NIHMS1519891
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
679-685Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR000448
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002345
Pays : United States
Références
J Craniofac Surg. 1993 Oct;4(4):247-54; discussion 255-6
pubmed: 8110906
Neurosurgery. 1993 May;32(5):785-91; discussion 791
pubmed: 8492853
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Apr;135(4):1077-84
pubmed: 25502856
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Mar;123(3):976-82
pubmed: 19319063
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Aug;122(2):563-71
pubmed: 18626375
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001 Dec;108(7):1862-70
pubmed: 11743369
J Craniofac Surg. 2018 Nov;29(8):2038-2042
pubmed: 29944555
Childs Nerv Syst. 2012 Sep;28(9):1333-9
pubmed: 22872245
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Nov;120(6):1603-11
pubmed: 18040195
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2017 Jan;70(1):110-119
pubmed: 27751830
J Craniofac Surg. 2010 Mar;21(2):462-7
pubmed: 20489451
J Craniofac Surg. 2010 Mar;21(2):358-62
pubmed: 20186087
J Craniofac Surg. 2016 Jan;27(1):258-63
pubmed: 26751427
J Craniofac Surg. 2013 May;24(3):917-22
pubmed: 23714911
World Neurosurg. 2014 Sep-Oct;82(3-4):e525-30
pubmed: 24036124
J Craniofac Surg. 2015 Jan;26(1):161-4
pubmed: 25569396
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 May;133(5):1261-75
pubmed: 24776557
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Feb;123(2):463-9
pubmed: 19182602
Stem Cells. 2011 Aug;29(8):1241-55
pubmed: 21656608
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011 Sep;64(9):e237-40
pubmed: 21741334
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006 Sep 15;118(4):977-84
pubmed: 16980860