Perioperative Comparison Between Open Cranial Vault Remodeling and Distraction Osteogenesis for Unilateral Lambdoid Craniosynostosis

被引:4
|
作者
Belza, Caitlyn C. [1 ]
Modi, Rishi N. [1 ]
Kamel, George N. [2 ,3 ]
McKee, Ryan M. [1 ]
Carbullido, Mary K. [4 ]
Kim, Erinn [2 ,3 ]
Gosman, Amanda A. [2 ,3 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Sch Med, La Jolla, CA USA
[2] Univ Calif San Diego, Div Plast Surg, La Jolla, CA USA
[3] Rady Childrens Hosp, San Diego, CA USA
[4] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Madison, WI USA
[5] Univ Calif San Diego, Rady Childrens Hosp, Div Plast Surg, 7920 Frost St, San Diego, CA 92123 USA
关键词
Craniosynostosis; distraction osteogenesis; open cranial vault reconstruction; unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis; SYNOSTOSIS;
D O I
10.1097/SCS.0000000000009227
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
There are multiple treatment options for unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (ULS) including open posterior cranial vault remodeling (OCVR) and distraction osteogenesis (DO). There is a paucity of data comparing these techniques in the treatment of ULS. This study compared the perioperative characteristics of these interventions for patients with ULS. An IRB-approved chart review was performed from January 1999 to November 2018 at a single institution. Inclusion criteria included the diagnosis of ULS, treatment with either OCVR or DO using a posterior rotational flap technique, and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Seventeen patients met the inclusion criteria (12 OCVR and 5 DO). Patients in each cohort were found to have a similar distribution in sex, age at the time of surgery, synostosis laterality, weight, and length of follow-up. There was no significant difference in mean estimated blood loss/kg, surgical time, or transfusion requirements between cohorts. Distraction osteogenesis patients had a longer mean hospital length of stay (3.4 +/- 0.6 d versus 2.0 +/- 0.6 d, P = 0.0004). All patients were admitted to the surgical ward postoperatively. In the OCVR cohort, complications included 1 dural tear, 1 surgical site infection, and 2 reoperations. In the DO cohort, 1 patient had a distraction site infection, treated with antibiotics. There was no significant difference in estimated blood loss, volume of blood transfusion, or surgical time between OCVR and DO. Patients who underwent OCVR had a higher incidence of postoperative complications and the need for reoperation. This data provides insight into the perioperative differences between OCVR and DO in patients with ULS.
引用
收藏
页码:1222 / 1225
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Is Less Actually More? An Evaluation of Surgical Outcomes Between Endoscopic Suturectomy and Open Cranial Vault Remodeling for Craniosynostosis
    Melin, Alyson A.
    Moffitt, Joseph
    Hopkins, David C.
    Shah, Manish N.
    Fletcher, Stephen A.
    Sandberg, David, I
    Teichgraeber, John F.
    Greives, Matthew R.
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2020, 31 (04) : 924 - 926
  • [42] Fronto-Orbital Advancement and Posterior Cranial Vault Expansion Using Distraction Osteogenesis in Patients With Multiple Craniosynostosis
    Kamil, Muhammad
    Oyoshi, Tatsuki
    Komasaku, Soichiro
    Kuroki, Shinichi
    Higa, Nayuta
    Yoshimoto, Koji
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2021, 32 (05) : 1882 - 1885
  • [43] Minimally Invasive Versus Open Cranial Vault Remodeling Procedures for Single-Suture Craniosynostosis What Do We Know?
    Massenburg, Benjamin B.
    Swanson, Jordan W.
    CLINICS IN PLASTIC SURGERY, 2025, 52 (02) : 193 - 207
  • [44] Discussion: Transverse Distraction Osteogenesis for Posterior Narrowing of the Cranial Vault
    Patel, Kamlesh B.
    Linkugel, Andrew
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2022, 149 (04) : 753E - 754E
  • [45] Frontal Hyperostosis in the Patients of Craniosynostosis After Cranial Distraction Osteogenesis
    Kawamoto, Koji
    Wu, Cheng Chun
    Imai, Keisuke
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2017, 28 (08) : 1939 - 1941
  • [46] Early cranial vault distraction for a more balanced and enhanced expansion: a 3D craniometric analysis of anterior versus posterior distraction osteogenesis in patients with craniosynostosis
    Jeon, Sungmi
    Chung, Jee Hyeok
    Kim, Sukwha
    Kim, Seung-Ki
    Phi, Ji Hoon
    Lee, Ji Yeoun
    Kim, Kyung Hyun
    Wang, Kyu-Chang
    Kim, Byung Jun
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-PEDIATRICS, 2021, 30 (01) : 60 - 67
  • [47] The Importance of Timing in Optimizing Cranial Vault Remodeling in Syndromic Craniosynostosis
    Utria, Alan F.
    Mundinger, Gerhard S.
    Bellamy, Justin L.
    Zhou, Joy
    Ghasemzadeh, Ali
    Yang, Robin
    Jallo, George I.
    Ahn, Edward S.
    Dorafshar, Amir H.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 135 (04) : 1077 - 1084
  • [48] Complications associated with gradual cranial vault distraction osteogenesis for the treatment of craniofacial synostosis
    Yonehara, Y
    Hirabayashi, S
    Sugawara, Y
    Sakurai, A
    Harii, K
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2003, 14 (04) : 526 - 528
  • [49] Treatment of Syndromic Craniosynostosis by Anterior and Posterior Vault Distraction Osteogenesis (A-PVDO)
    Shen, Weimin
    Cui, Jie
    Chen, Jianbing
    Yi, Ji
    Kong, Liangliang
    Sun, Buhao
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2022, 33 (02) : 654 - 656
  • [50] A Comparison of Subgaleal Versus Subperiosteal Dissection in Open Cranial Vault Expansion for Sagittal Craniosynostosis
    Cho, Daniel Y.
    Birgfeld, Craig B.
    Lee, Amy
    Ellenbogen, Richard G.
    Susarla, Srinivas M.
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2020, 143 : 108 - 113