Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Jul;25(4):1245-8.
doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000000925.

Microscopic versus open approach to craniosynostosis: a long-term outcomes comparison

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Microscopic versus open approach to craniosynostosis: a long-term outcomes comparison

John F Teichgraeber et al. J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of using the microscopic minimally invasive approach for the treatment of nonsyndromic craniosynostosis. During the last 10 years, 180 consecutive patients with nonsyndromic craniosynostosis were treated: 67 patients were treated with microscopic minimally invasive approach, and 113 were treated with the open approach. In the microscopic group, there was 1 intraoperative complication (1.5%). There were 10 postoperative complications (14.9%), of which 9 required major reoperations and 1 required a minor procedure. The major complications occurred in 7 unicoronal patients (58.3%) and 2 metopic patients (25.0%). In the open-approach group, there were 8 complications (7.1%), 2 patients required major reoperations and 6 required minor procedures. Chi-squared test showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the overall complication rate between the microscopic and open approaches. However, in the unicoronal patients, the complication rate was significantly higher in the microscopic group (P < 0.001). In conclusion, the microscopic approach is our treatment of choice in nonsyndromic patients with sagittal and lambdoidal craniosynostosis. We no longer use the microscopic approach in patients with unicoronal or metopic craniosynostosis because of the high complication rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Barone CM, Jimenez DF. Endoscopic craniectomy for early correction of craniosynostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999;104:1965–1973. discussion 1974–1965. - PubMed
    1. Barone CM, Jimenez DF. Endoscopic approach to coronal craniosynostosis. Clin Plast Surg. 2004;31:415–422. - PubMed
    1. Lauritzen CG, Davis C, Ivarsson A, et al. The evolving role of springs in craniofacial surgery: the first 100 clinical cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:545–554. - PubMed
    1. Windh P, Davis C, Sanger C, et al. Spring-assisted cranioplasty vs pi-plasty for sagittal synostosis—a long term follow-up study. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:59–64. - PubMed
    1. David LR, Plikaitis CM, Couture D, et al. Outcome analysis of our first 75 spring-assisted surgeries for scaphocephaly. J Craniofac Surg. 2010;21:3–9. - PubMed

Publication types

Supplementary concepts