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
. 2023 Aug 1;152(2):397-404.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010332. Epub 2023 Feb 28.

Secondary Corrections for Single-Suture Craniosynostosis: Perioperative Outcomes and Predisposing Factors

Aditi Kanth  1 , Kanlaya Ditthakasem  2 , Morley Herbert  2 , Jeffrey A Fearon  3
Affiliations

Secondary Corrections for Single-Suture Craniosynostosis: Perioperative Outcomes and Predisposing Factors

Aditi Kanth et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Many single-suture craniosynostosis corrections end up needing secondary remodeling procedures. The authors sought to determine whether these more complicated operations carry higher complication rates, and to explore potential predisposing factors.

Methods: The authors performed a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing primary and secondary remodeling corrections at a single center, between 2010 and 2020.

Results: Of 491 sequential single-suture corrections, 380 were primary procedures and 111 were secondary (89.2% initially treated elsewhere); 10.3% of primary procedures received allogeneic blood versus only 1.8% of secondary corrections ( p =0.005). Median hospital lengths of stays were similar between groups [primary, 2.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2 to 2); secondary, 2.0 days (IQR, 2 to 2)], as were surgical infection rates (primary, 0%; secondary, 0.9%). With respect to predisposing factors, the affected suture and presence of a genetic mutation did not appear predictive; however, the median age at primary correction was significantly younger for those needing second procedures [6.0 months (IQR, 4 to 9 months) versus 12.0 months (IQR, 11 to 16 months)]. An odds ratio estimate suggests that for every month increase in age, the odds of undergoing a reoperation drops 40%. With respect to surgical indications, concerns for raised intracranial pressure and skull defects were more commonly cited following strip craniectomies than remodeling procedures.

Conclusions: This single-center review was unable to identify a higher risk profile for reoperations. In addition, analyses suggest that performing primary corrections at a younger age and, possibly, strip craniectomies were associated with a higher likelihood of a subsequent secondary correction.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Carlisle MP, Mehta ST, Sykes KJ, Singhal VK. Serial head circumference and neurodevelopmental screening after surgical correction for single- and multiple-suture craniosynostosis. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2012;49:177–184.
    1. Pearson GD, Havlik RJ, Eppley B, Nykiel M, Sadove AM. Craniosynostosis: a single institution’s outcome assessment from surgical reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg. 2008;19:65–71.
    1. Paige KT, Cohen SR, Simms C, Burstein FD, Hudgins R, Boydston W. Predicting the risk of reoperation in metopic synostosis: a quantitative CT scan analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2003;51:167–172.
    1. Fearon JA, McLaughlin EB, Kolar JC. Sagittal craniosynostosis: surgical outcomes and long-term growth. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:532–541.
    1. Fearon JA, Dimas V, Ditthakasem K. Lambdoid craniosynostosis: the relationship with Chiari deformations and an analysis of surgical outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137:946–951.