Physiologic Timeline of Cranial-Base Suture and Synchondrosis Closure.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery
ISSN: 1529-4242
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1306050
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2021
01 Dec 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
28
10
2021
medline:
21
1
2022
entrez:
27
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Fusion of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses presents a clinical conundrum, given their often unclear "normal" timing of closure. This study investigates the physiologic fusion timelines of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses. Twenty-three age intervals were analyzed in subjects aged 0 to 18 years. For each age interval, 10 head computed tomographic scans of healthy subjects were assessed. Thirteen cranial-base sutures/synchondroses were evaluated for patency. Partial closure in greater than or equal to 50 percent of subjects and complete bilateral closure in less than 50 percent of subjects defined the fusion "midpoint." Factor analysis identified clusters of related fusion patterns. Two hundred thirty scans met inclusion criteria. The sutures' fusion midpoints and completion ages, respectively, were as follows: frontoethmoidal, 0 to 2 months and 4 years; frontosphenoidal, 6 to 8 months and 12 years; and sphenoparietal, 6 to 8 months and 4 years. Sphenosquamosal, sphenopetrosal, parietosquamosal, and parietomastoid sutures reached the midpoint at 6 to 8 months, 8 years, 9 to 11 months, and 12 years, respectively, but rarely completed fusion. The occipitomastoid suture partially closed in less than or equal to 30 percent of subjects. The synchondroses' fusion midpoints and completion ages, respectively, were as follows: sphenoethmoidal, 3 to 5 months and 5 years; spheno-occipital, 9 years and 17 years; anterior intraoccipital, 4 years and 10 years; and posterior intraoccipital, 18 to 23 months and 4 years. The petro-occipital synchondrosis reached the midpoint at 11 years and completely fused in less than 50 percent of subjects. Order of fusion of the sutures, but not the synchondroses, followed the anterior-to-posterior direction. Factor analysis suggested three separate fusion patterns. The fusion timelines of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses may help providers interpret computed tomographic data of patients with head-shape abnormalities. Future work should elucidate the mechanisms and sequelae of cranial-base suture fusion that deviates from normal timelines.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Fusion of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses presents a clinical conundrum, given their often unclear "normal" timing of closure. This study investigates the physiologic fusion timelines of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses.
METHODS
METHODS
Twenty-three age intervals were analyzed in subjects aged 0 to 18 years. For each age interval, 10 head computed tomographic scans of healthy subjects were assessed. Thirteen cranial-base sutures/synchondroses were evaluated for patency. Partial closure in greater than or equal to 50 percent of subjects and complete bilateral closure in less than 50 percent of subjects defined the fusion "midpoint." Factor analysis identified clusters of related fusion patterns.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Two hundred thirty scans met inclusion criteria. The sutures' fusion midpoints and completion ages, respectively, were as follows: frontoethmoidal, 0 to 2 months and 4 years; frontosphenoidal, 6 to 8 months and 12 years; and sphenoparietal, 6 to 8 months and 4 years. Sphenosquamosal, sphenopetrosal, parietosquamosal, and parietomastoid sutures reached the midpoint at 6 to 8 months, 8 years, 9 to 11 months, and 12 years, respectively, but rarely completed fusion. The occipitomastoid suture partially closed in less than or equal to 30 percent of subjects. The synchondroses' fusion midpoints and completion ages, respectively, were as follows: sphenoethmoidal, 3 to 5 months and 5 years; spheno-occipital, 9 years and 17 years; anterior intraoccipital, 4 years and 10 years; and posterior intraoccipital, 18 to 23 months and 4 years. The petro-occipital synchondrosis reached the midpoint at 11 years and completely fused in less than 50 percent of subjects. Order of fusion of the sutures, but not the synchondroses, followed the anterior-to-posterior direction. Factor analysis suggested three separate fusion patterns.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The fusion timelines of cranial-base sutures/synchondroses may help providers interpret computed tomographic data of patients with head-shape abnormalities. Future work should elucidate the mechanisms and sequelae of cranial-base suture fusion that deviates from normal timelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34705810
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008570
pii: 00006534-202112000-00028
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
973e-982eInformations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Références
Beederman M, Farina EM, Reid RR. Molecular basis of cranial suture biology and disease: Osteoblastic and osteoclastic perspectives. Genes Dis. 2014;1:120–125.
Jin SW, Sim KB, Kim SD. Development and growth of the normal cranial vault: An embryologic review. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2016;59:192–196.
Vu HL, Panchal J, Parker EE, Levine NS, Francel P. The timing of physiologic closure of the metopic suture: A review of 159 patients using reconstructed 3D CT scans of the craniofacial region. J Craniofac Surg. 2001;12:527–532.
Kajdic N, Spazzapan P, Velnar T. Craniosynostosis: Recognition, clinical characteristics, and treatment. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2018;18:110–116.
Goodrich JT. Skull base growth in craniosynostosis. Childs Nerv Syst. 2005;21:871–879.
Mazzaferro DM, Taylor JA. Reply: Orthognathic surgery has a significant effect on perceived personality traits and emotional expressions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141:967e–968e.
Runyan CM, Xu W, Alperovich M, et al. Minor suture fusion in syndromic craniosynostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:434e–445e.
Badve CA, Mallikarjunappa MK, Iyer RS, Ishak GE, Khanna PC. Craniosynostosis: Imaging review and primer on computed tomography. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43:728–742; quiz 725–727.
Calandrelli R, D’Apolito G, Gaudino S, Sciandra MC, Caldarelli M, Colosimo C. Identification of skull base sutures and craniofacial anomalies in children with craniosynostosis: Utility of multidetector CT. Radiol Med. 2014;119:694–704.
Calandrelli R, D’Apolito G, Massimi L, et al. Quantitative analysis of craniofacial dysmorphology in infants with anterior synostotic plagiocephaly. Childs Nerv Syst. 2016;32:2339–2349.
Wiley Online Library. Factor analysis. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online. Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781118445112 . Accessed August 8, 2020.
Kaiser M. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure for identity correlation matrix. J R Stat Soc. 1974;52:296–298.
Bartlett MS. The effect of standardization on a χ 2 approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika 1951;38:337–344.
Field A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 2013.Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage;
Horn JL. A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 1965;30:179–185.
Abdi H. Factor rotations in factor analyses. In: Encyclopedia for Research Methods for the Social Sciences. 2003:Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage; 792–795.
Costello AB, Osborne J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. PARE 2005;10:1–10.
McBratney-Owen B, Iseki S, Bamforth SD, Olsen BR, Morriss-Kay GM. Development and tissue origins of the mammalian cranial base. Dev Biol. 2008;322:121–132.
Morriss-Kay GM. Derivation of the mammalian skull vault. J Anat. 2001;199:143–151.
Wilkie AO, Morriss-Kay GM. Genetics of craniofacial development and malformation. Nat Rev Genet. 2001;2:458–468.
Jiang X, Iseki S, Maxson RE, Sucov HM, Morriss-Kay GM. Tissue origins and interactions in the mammalian skull vault. Dev Biol. 2002;241:106–116.
Madeline LA, Elster AD. Suture closure in the human chondrocranium: CT assessment. Radiology 1995;196:747–756.
Paetz P, Goetz GF, Lanfermann H, Giesemann AM. The developing temporal bone: Computed tomography measurements and assessment of suture closure from birth to 18 years of age. Surg Radiol Anat. 2017;39:663–671.
Kalender WA. Computed Tomography: Fundamentals, System Technology, Image Quality, Applications. 2011.New York: Wiley;
Lieberman DE, Ross CF, Ravosa MJ. The primate cranial base: Ontogeny, function, and integration. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2000;31(Suppl):117–169.
Smith TD, McMahon MJ, Millen ME, et al. Growth and development at the sphenoethmoidal junction in perinatal primates. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2017;300:2115–2137.
de Ribaupierre S, Czorny A, Pittet B, Jacques B, Rilliet B. Frontosphenoidal synostosis: A rare cause of unilateral anterior plagiocephaly. Childs Nerv Syst. 2007;23:1431–1438.
Marucci DD, Jones BM, Dunaway DJ, Hayward RD. Unilateral isolated frontosphenoidal craniosynostosis causing frontal plagiocephaly. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62:e255–e258.
Mundinger GS, Skladman R, Wenger T, et al. Defining and correcting asymmetry in isolated unilateral frontosphenoidal synostosis: Differences in orbital shape, facial scoliosis, and skullbase twist compared to unilateral coronal synostosis. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29:29–35.
Rice DP. Craniofacial Sutures: Development, Disease and Treatment. 2008.Basel, Switzerland: Karger;
Hansen M, Mulliken JB. Frontal plagiocephaly: Diagnosis and treatment. Clin Plast Surg. 1994;21:543–553.
Gagan JR, Tholpady SS, Ogle RC. Cellular dynamics and tissue interactions of the dura mater during head development. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today 2007;81:297–304.
Servoss JM. An in vivo and in vitro autoradiographic investigation of growth in synchondrosal cartilage. Am J Anat. 1973;136:479–485.
Kuroda T, Miura F, Nakamura T, Noguchi K. Cellular kinetics of synchondroseal cartilage in organ culture. Proc Finn Dent Soc. 1981;77:89–94.
Kantomaa T, Pirttiniemi P, Tuominen M. Cranial base and the growth of the cranial vault: An experimental study on the rabbit. Proc Finn Dent Soc. 1991;87:93–98.
Mitchell LA, Kitley CA, Armitage TL, Krasnokutsky MV, Rooks VJ. Normal sagittal and coronal suture widths by using CT imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32:1801–1805.
Doro D, Liu A, Grigoriadis AE, Liu KJ. The osteogenic potential of the neural crest lineage may contribute to craniosynostosis. Mol Syndromol. 2019;10:48–57.
Tabler JM, Rice CP, Liu KJ, Wallingford JB. A novel ciliopathic skull defect arising from excess neural crest. Dev Biol. 2016;417:4–10.
Bastidas N, Mackay DDJ, Taylor JA, Bartlett SP. Analysis of the long-term outcomes of nonsyndromic bicoronal synostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130:877–883.
Goldstein JA, Paliga JT, Wink JD, Bartlett SP, Nah HD, Taylor JA. Earlier evidence of spheno-occipital synchondrosis fusion correlates with severity of midface hypoplasia in patients with syndromic craniosynostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134:504–510.
Persing JA, Morgan EP, Cronin AJ, Wolcott WP. Skull base expansion: Craniofacial effects. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;87:1028–1033.