Evolution of Operative Techniques for the Treatment of Single-Suture Metopic Synostosis

Purpose:Primary orbitocranioplasty for metopic craniosynostosis encompasses a variety of techniques, with variable long-term success. The authors present a series illustrating the evolution of surgical techniques and its impact on surgical outcomes. Methods:All patients with single-suture metopic synostosis treated at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia from 1975–2004 were included. Demographic information, preoperative clinical findings, operative technique, postoperative complications, postoperative clinical findings, and length of follow-up were all recorded. Five techniques are presented, reflecting a transition from mere reshaping with metallic fixation to the increased use of primary bone grafting and resorbable fixation to expand the frontal region. Preoperative covariates and technique type were analyzed for effect on outcomes. Results:Eighty-six patients were identified. Mean follow-up was 50 months. In terms of esthetic outcome, patients with preoperative frontal irregularities had a higher incidence of postoperative deformities (P = 0.026). Patients with preoperative mean intercanthal distance <20 had a higher incidence of postoperative frontal irregularities (P = 0.045). Maximal expansion of the supraorbital bar via interpositional bone graft and stabilization of the construct with strategic bone grafting and resorbable fixation resulted in a lower incidence of postoperative temporal hollowing (P = 0.029). Patients with expansion and lateral reinforcement of the expanded bar had a lower incidence of reoperation (P = 0.026). Conclusions:Undercorrection of metopic craniosynostosis is not an uncommon finding. To prevent long-term relapse, aggressive anterolateral expansion of the supraorbital bar via primary bone grafting and resorbable fixation with the overall goal of overcorrection may provide the best esthetic outcome.

[1]  J. Fearon,et al.  Sagittal Craniosynostosis: Surgical Outcomes and Long-Term Growth , 2006, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[2]  Min S. Park,et al.  Surgical correction of metopic synostosis , 2005, Child's Nervous System.

[3]  L. Hollier Mild Trigonocephaly with Clinical Symptoms: Analysis of Surgical Results in 65 Patients. , 2004 .

[4]  K. Paige,et al.  Predicting the Risk of Reoperation in Metopic Synostosis: A Quantitative CT Scan Analysis , 2003, Annals of plastic surgery.

[5]  J. Richtsmeier,et al.  Three‐dimensional morphological analysis of isolated metopic synostosis , 1999, The Anatomical record.

[6]  L A Whitaker,et al.  Analysis and treatment of severe trigonocephaly. , 1999, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[7]  D. Rénier,et al.  Functional Outcome after Surgery for Trigonocephaly , 1998, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[8]  J. Marsh,et al.  Long‐Term Studies of Metopic Synostosis: Frequency of Cognitive Impairment and Behavioral Disturbances , 1996, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[9]  Jack C. Yu,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Effects of Craniofacial Growth on the Long‐Term Positional Stability of Microfixation , 1996, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[10]  K. Muraszko,et al.  Metopic Synostosis: Evaluation of Aesthetic Results , 1994, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  I. Jackson Surgery of Cranial Base Tumors , 1994 .

[12]  Phillip K. T. Chen,et al.  Metopic Synostosis: Quantitative Assessment of Presenting Deformity and Surgical Results Based on CT Scans , 1993, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[13]  L. Whitaker,et al.  The Operative Treatment of Isolated Craniofacial Dysostosis (Plagiocephaly): A Comparison of the Unilateral and Bilateral Techniques , 1990, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[14]  S. Bartlett,et al.  Craniosynostosis: an analysis of the timing, treatment, and complications in 164 consecutive patients. , 1987, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[15]  J. Jane,et al.  Surgical approaches for the correction of metopic synostosis. , 1986, Neurosurgery.

[16]  R. Albin,et al.  Trigonocephaly: Refinements in Reconstruction. Experience with 33 Patients , 1985, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[17]  D. Enlow,et al.  The Influence of the Recipient Site on Bone Grafts to the Face , 1984, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[18]  K. Oh,et al.  Uncomplicated trigonocephaly. A radiographic affirmation of conservative therapy. , 1981, Radiology.

[19]  J. Salzmann Handbook of facial growth , 1977 .

[20]  M. Moss,et al.  The primary role of functional matrices in facial growth. , 1969, American journal of orthodontics.

[21]  F. M. Anderson,et al.  Trigonocephaly. Identity and surgical treatment. , 1962, Journal of neurosurgery.

[22]  J. Posnick,et al.  Sagittal synostosis: quantitative assessment of presenting deformity and surgical results based on CT scans. , 1993, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[23]  D. Rénier,et al.  Experience with the "floating forehead". , 1988, British journal of plastic surgery.

[24]  S. Bartlett,et al.  The craniofacial dysostoses: guidelines for management of the symmetric and asymmetric deformities. , 1987, Clinics in plastic surgery.