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
. 2024 Dec 18;41(1):59.
doi: 10.1007/s00381-024-06662-8.

Endoscopic-assisted versus open fronto-orbital distraction for unicoronal craniosynostosis: morphometric and technique considerations

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Endoscopic-assisted versus open fronto-orbital distraction for unicoronal craniosynostosis: morphometric and technique considerations

Meagan Wu et al. Childs Nerv Syst. .

Abstract

Introduction: In an effort to maximize benefit and minimize morbidity when performing fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis (FODO) for unilateral coronal synostosis (UCS), we have transitioned to an endoscopic-assisted approach ("endo-FODO"). This study compares photogrammetric outcomes of patients who underwent FODO via an endoscopic-assisted versus open approach.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients treated for UCS from 2013 to 2023. Photogrammetric outcomes at one to three years postoperatively were compared between patients who underwent endo-FODO and age- and sex-matched controls who underwent open FODO. Differences between pre- and postoperative periorbital symmetry ratios, canthal tilt symmetry, and orbital dystopia angle (ODA) were calculated.

Results: Twenty patients (ten per group) underwent surgery at a mean age of 6.1 ± 1.8 and 5.4 ± 1.1 months (p = 0.426) and were photographed at 1.6 ± 0.9 and 1.8 ± 0.9 years (p = 0.597) postoperatively in the endo-FODO and open FODO groups, respectively. Patients who underwent endo-FODO demonstrated significant improvements in margin-reflex distance 1 (MRD1) symmetry ratio (p = 0.004), palpebral height symmetry ratio (p = 0.004), canthal tilt symmetry (p = 0.020), and ODA (p = 0.009). Patients who underwent open FODO likewise demonstrated significant improvements in MRD1 symmetry ratio (p = 0.004), palpebral height symmetry ratio (p = 0.033), and ODA (p = 0.004). All postoperative measurements as well as degrees of improvement were similar between groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: Endo- and open FODO were associated with significant and comparable improvements in soft tissue periorbital symmetry and orbital dystopia at nearly two years postoperatively. While continued follow-up until cranial maturity is needed to assess the durability of aesthetic results, these data support a minimally invasive, endoscopic alternative to fronto-orbital distraction.

Keywords: Endoscopic; Fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis; Minimally invasive; Unilateral coronal synostosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Competing interest: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Illustration of our minimally invasive, endoscopic-assisted approach to fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis, which demonstrates a critical view through the pterional window that serves as the predominant working portal for the sphenoid wing and orbital roof osteotomies (Copyright © 2024 Meagan Wu)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Intraoperative photographs of a female patient with right unicoronal synostosis undergoing internal distractor placement for open fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis via a coronal incision
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
All soft tissue parameters are demonstrated on the preoperative frontal photograph of a male patient with left unicoronal synostosis who underwent fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis at five months of age. Periorbital measurements included margin-reflex-distance 1, pupil-to-brow distance, palpebral fissure height and width, and canthal tilt angle. MRD1 margin-reflex-distance 1, PTB pupil-to-brow distance, PH palpebral height, PW palpebral width, ODA orbital dystopia angle
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
A female patient with right unicoronal synostosis is shown before undergoing endoscopic-assisted fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis at five months of age (top row) and three years postoperatively (bottom row)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
A female patient with left unicoronal synostosis is shown before undergoing open fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis at four months of age (top row) and at two years postoperatively (bottom row)

Similar articles

References

    1. Selber JC, Brooks C, Kurichi JE, Temmen T, Sonnad SS, Whitaker LA (2008) Long-term results following fronto-orbital reconstruction in nonsyndromic unicoronal synostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(5):251e–260e. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31816a9f88 - PubMed
    1. McCarthy JG, Glasberg SB, Cutting CB et al (1995) Twenty-year experience with early surgery for craniosynostosis: I. Isolated craniofacial synostosis—results and unsolved problems. Plast Reconstr Surg. 96(2):272–283. 10.1097/00006534-199508000-00004 - PubMed
    1. Selber JC, Brooks C, Kurichi JE, Temmen T, Sonnad SS, Whitaker LA (2008) Long-term results following fronto-orbital reconstruction in nonsyndromic unicoronal synostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 121(5):251e–260e. 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31816a9f88 - PubMed
    1. Hoppe IC, Taylor JA (2021) A cohort study of strabismus rates following correction of the unicoronal craniosynostosis deformity: conventional bilateral fronto-orbital advancement versus fronto-orbital distraction osteogenesis. J Craniofac Surg 32(7):2362–2365. 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007773 - PubMed
    1. Massenburg BB, Tolley PD, Lee A, Susarla SM (2022) Fronto-orbital advancement for metopic and unilateral coronal craniosynostoses. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 34(3):367–380. 10.1016/j.coms.2022.01.001 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources