Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Child's Nervous System 10/2004

01-10-2004 | A. J. Raimondi ISPN Award

Indication for and surgical outcomes of the distraction method in various types of craniosynostosis

Advantages, disadvantages, and current concepts for surgical strategy in the treatment of craniosynostosis

Authors: Yuichiro Nonaka, Shizuo Oi, Takeshi Miyawaki, Akihiko Shinoda, Kunihiro Kurihara

Published in: Child's Nervous System | Issue 10/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Various surgical techniques for the treatment of craniosynostosis using distraction devices have been described over the last few years and we have applied these procedures in seven patients with varying types of craniosynostosis. The aim of this report is to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of these surgical methods and to discuss current concepts for the surgical strategy in the treatment of craniosynostosis.

Material and methods

From January 2001 to March 2003, 25 patients with craniosynostosis were examined. Among them, 7 patients, 5 with Apert syndrome, 1 with Crouzon disease, and 1 with multiple-synostosis, underwent surgical treatment using the distraction method with internal distraction devices, according to our treatment strategy for craniosynostosis. All patients underwent preoperative and postoperative evaluations, which included the patient’s neurological state, developmental quotient (DQ), and three-dimensional CT (3D-CT).

Results

The timing of the procedures undertaken was between the ages of 1 year 5 months and 12 years 6 months (mean age 4 years 11 months). Five patients had received previous treatment and this procedure was used as a secondary operation. Postoperative distraction distances varied from 7 to 20.5 mm (mean distraction distance: 14 mm). Satisfactory cranial volume expansion and aesthetically pleasing morphological states were achieved in all cases. Regarding complications, one patient required re-operation because of dislocation of the device and skin erosion caused by infection around the penetrated wound. Finally, in a second patient a distortion of the device occurred, but no re-operation was needed.

Conclusion

The advantage of the distraction method is its applicability for Toddler or Elder Children Calvarial Reconstruction to correct cosmetic and functional problems. One disadvantage is the difficulty in using it for Infantile Calvarial Normalization because of thin calvarial bones and the necessity for re-operation to remove the device, which may result in it becoming a “fixation procedure,” essentially contraindicated for the fast-developing brain and calvarias. However, the efficacy of this procedure is that the many advantages outweigh the disadvantages as sufficient calvarial expansion and good results using the distraction method, especially in toddler and elder children age groups, can be achieved.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Alonso N, Munhoz AM, Fogaça W, Ferreira MC (1998) Midfacial advancement by bone distraction for treatment of craniofacial deformities. J Craniofac Surg 9:114–118PubMed Alonso N, Munhoz AM, Fogaça W, Ferreira MC (1998) Midfacial advancement by bone distraction for treatment of craniofacial deformities. J Craniofac Surg 9:114–118PubMed
2.
go back to reference Chin M, Toth BA (1997) Le Fort III advancement with gradual distraction using internal devices. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:819–830PubMed Chin M, Toth BA (1997) Le Fort III advancement with gradual distraction using internal devices. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:819–830PubMed
3.
go back to reference Cohen SR, Boydston W, Hudgins R, Burstein FD (1999) Monobloc and facial bipartition distraction with internal devices. J Craniofac Surg 10:244–251PubMed Cohen SR, Boydston W, Hudgins R, Burstein FD (1999) Monobloc and facial bipartition distraction with internal devices. J Craniofac Surg 10:244–251PubMed
4.
go back to reference Gosain AK, Santoro TD, Havlik RJ, Cohen SR, Holmes RE (2002) Midface distraction following Le Fort III and monobloc osteotomies: problems and solutions. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:1797–1808CrossRefPubMed Gosain AK, Santoro TD, Havlik RJ, Cohen SR, Holmes RE (2002) Midface distraction following Le Fort III and monobloc osteotomies: problems and solutions. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:1797–1808CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Hirabayashi S, Sugawara Y, Sakurai A, Harii K, Park S (1998) Frontoorbital advancement by gradual distraction. Technical note. J Neurosurg 89:1058–1061PubMed Hirabayashi S, Sugawara Y, Sakurai A, Harii K, Park S (1998) Frontoorbital advancement by gradual distraction. Technical note. J Neurosurg 89:1058–1061PubMed
6.
go back to reference Holmes AD, Wright GW, Meara JG, Heggie AA, Probert TC (2002) Le Fort III internal distraction in syndromic craniosynostosis. J Craniofac Surg 13:262–272CrossRefPubMed Holmes AD, Wright GW, Meara JG, Heggie AA, Probert TC (2002) Le Fort III internal distraction in syndromic craniosynostosis. J Craniofac Surg 13:262–272CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Imai K, Komune H, Toda C, Nomachi T et al (2002) Cranial remodeling to treat craniosynostosis by gradual distraction using a new device. J Neurosurg 96:654–659PubMed Imai K, Komune H, Toda C, Nomachi T et al (2002) Cranial remodeling to treat craniosynostosis by gradual distraction using a new device. J Neurosurg 96:654–659PubMed
8.
go back to reference Marchac D, Renier D (1979) “Le front flottant”. Traitement précoce des faciocraniosténoses. Ann Chir Plast 24:121–126PubMed Marchac D, Renier D (1979) “Le front flottant”. Traitement précoce des faciocraniosténoses. Ann Chir Plast 24:121–126PubMed
9.
go back to reference Marie-Lannelongue (1890) De la craniectomie dans la microcéphalie. CR Acad Sci (Paris) 110:1382 Marie-Lannelongue (1890) De la craniectomie dans la microcéphalie. CR Acad Sci (Paris) 110:1382
10.
go back to reference McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N et al (1992) Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg 89:1–8PubMed McCarthy JG, Schreiber J, Karp N et al (1992) Lengthening the human mandible by gradual distraction. Plast Reconstr Surg 89:1–8PubMed
11.
go back to reference Oi S (2003) Treatment of craniosynostosis: treatment strategy in various ages and types of craniosynostosis (abstract). 21st Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery Oi S (2003) Treatment of craniosynostosis: treatment strategy in various ages and types of craniosynostosis (abstract). 21st Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
12.
go back to reference Oi S (2004) “Development in harmony” the presidential address, 31st Annual Meeting of ISPN, Monaco 2003. Childs Nerv Syst (submitted) Oi S (2004) “Development in harmony” the presidential address, 31st Annual Meeting of ISPN, Monaco 2003. Childs Nerv Syst (submitted)
13.
go back to reference Oi S, Matsumoto S (1987) Trigonocephaly (metopic synostosis). Clinical, surgical and anatomical concepts. Childs Nerv Syst 3:259–265PubMed Oi S, Matsumoto S (1987) Trigonocephaly (metopic synostosis). Clinical, surgical and anatomical concepts. Childs Nerv Syst 3:259–265PubMed
14.
go back to reference Ortiz-Monasterio F, Fuente del Campo A, Carillo A (1978) Advancement of the orbits and midface in one piece, combined with frontal repositioning, for the correction of Crouzon’s deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 61:507–516PubMed Ortiz-Monasterio F, Fuente del Campo A, Carillo A (1978) Advancement of the orbits and midface in one piece, combined with frontal repositioning, for the correction of Crouzon’s deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 61:507–516PubMed
15.
go back to reference Ortiz-Monasterio F, Fuente del Campo A, Carillo A (1985) Refinements on the bloc orbitofacial advancement. In: Caronni E (ed) Craniofacial surgery. Little Brown, Boston, pp 263–274 Ortiz-Monasterio F, Fuente del Campo A, Carillo A (1985) Refinements on the bloc orbitofacial advancement. In: Caronni E (ed) Craniofacial surgery. Little Brown, Boston, pp 263–274
16.
go back to reference Persing JA, Edgerton MT, Park TS et al (1987) Barrel stave osteotomy for correction of turribrachycephaly craniosynostosis deformity. Ann Plast Surg 18:488–493PubMed Persing JA, Edgerton MT, Park TS et al (1987) Barrel stave osteotomy for correction of turribrachycephaly craniosynostosis deformity. Ann Plast Surg 18:488–493PubMed
17.
go back to reference Polley JW, Figueroa AA (1997) Management of severely maxillary deficiency in childhood and adolescence through distraction osteogenesis with an external adjustable, rigid distraction device. J Craniofac Surg 8:181–185PubMed Polley JW, Figueroa AA (1997) Management of severely maxillary deficiency in childhood and adolescence through distraction osteogenesis with an external adjustable, rigid distraction device. J Craniofac Surg 8:181–185PubMed
18.
go back to reference Polley JW, Figueroa AA, Charbel FT, Berkowitz R, Reisberg D, Cohen M (1995) Monobloc craniomaxillofacial distraction osteogenesis in a new born with sever craniofacial synostosis: a preliminary report. J Craniofac Surg 6:421–423PubMed Polley JW, Figueroa AA, Charbel FT, Berkowitz R, Reisberg D, Cohen M (1995) Monobloc craniomaxillofacial distraction osteogenesis in a new born with sever craniofacial synostosis: a preliminary report. J Craniofac Surg 6:421–423PubMed
19.
go back to reference Renier D, Arnaud E, Cinalli G, Sebag G, Zerah M, Marchac D (1996) Prognosis for mental function in Apert’s syndrome. J Neurosurg 85:66–72PubMed Renier D, Arnaud E, Cinalli G, Sebag G, Zerah M, Marchac D (1996) Prognosis for mental function in Apert’s syndrome. J Neurosurg 85:66–72PubMed
20.
go back to reference Renier D, Lajeunie E, Arnaud E, Marchac D (2000) Management of craniosynostosis. Childs Nerv Syst 16:645–658CrossRefPubMed Renier D, Lajeunie E, Arnaud E, Marchac D (2000) Management of craniosynostosis. Childs Nerv Syst 16:645–658CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Rogers-Salyer M, Jensen AG, Barden RC (1987) Effects of facial deformities and physical attractiveness on mother–infant bonding. In: Marchac D (ed) Craniofacial surgery. Proceedings of the First International Congress of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Springer, Berlin, pp 481–485 Rogers-Salyer M, Jensen AG, Barden RC (1987) Effects of facial deformities and physical attractiveness on mother–infant bonding. In: Marchac D (ed) Craniofacial surgery. Proceedings of the First International Congress of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Springer, Berlin, pp 481–485
22.
go back to reference Tessier P (1971) The definitive plastic surgical treatment of the severe facial deformities of craniofacial dysostosis: Crouzon’s and Apert’s diseases. Plast Reconstr Surg 48:419–442PubMed Tessier P (1971) The definitive plastic surgical treatment of the severe facial deformities of craniofacial dysostosis: Crouzon’s and Apert’s diseases. Plast Reconstr Surg 48:419–442PubMed
23.
go back to reference Uemura T, Hayashi T, Satoh K, Mitsukawa N, Yoshikawa A, Suse T, Furukawa Y (2003) Three-dimensional cranial expansion using distraction osteogenesis for oxycephaly. J Craniofac Surg 14:29–36CrossRefPubMed Uemura T, Hayashi T, Satoh K, Mitsukawa N, Yoshikawa A, Suse T, Furukawa Y (2003) Three-dimensional cranial expansion using distraction osteogenesis for oxycephaly. J Craniofac Surg 14:29–36CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference van der Meulen JC (1979) Medial fasciotomy. Br J Plast Surg 32:339–342PubMed van der Meulen JC (1979) Medial fasciotomy. Br J Plast Surg 32:339–342PubMed
Metadata
Title
Indication for and surgical outcomes of the distraction method in various types of craniosynostosis
Advantages, disadvantages, and current concepts for surgical strategy in the treatment of craniosynostosis
Authors
Yuichiro Nonaka
Shizuo Oi
Takeshi Miyawaki
Akihiko Shinoda
Kunihiro Kurihara
Publication date
01-10-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Child's Nervous System / Issue 10/2004
Print ISSN: 0256-7040
Electronic ISSN: 1433-0350
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-004-0917-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2004

Child's Nervous System 10/2004 Go to the issue

Announcements

Oktober 2004