Analysis of clinical outcomes for treatment of sagittal craniosynostosis: a comparison of endoscopic suturectomy and cranial vault remodeling

Abstract

OBJECTIVEComparative effectiveness studies are needed for analyzing the clinical outcomes of treatment of sagittal craniosynostosis (SC) with endoscopic suturectomy (ES) or cranial vault remodeling (CVR).METHODSFrom 2004–2015, patients were consecutively reviewed and data recorded for operative details and complications. Cranial growth was measured by head circumference percentile (HCP) and cranial index (CI) Z-score. Aesthetic outcomes were compared using the Whitaker classification.RESULTSA total of 207 patients with nonsyndromic SC were treated with ES (n = 187) or CVR (n = 20). The ES group had a lower median operative duration (45 vs 195 minutes), length of stay (1 vs 3 days), and transfusion rate (2% vs 85%; p < 0.0001). Median age at follow-up was 3.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5–4.5, ES) and 3.9 years (IQR 2–5, CVR; p = 0.12). In both groups, HCP gradually decreased during a 3-year follow-up (p = 0.282). CI Z-scores were initially more favorable in the ES group (p < 0.05); 3 years following surgical intervention, Z-scores were equal between groups (p = 0.392). One nonsyndromic patient treated with ES (0.5%) demonstrated reossification and required secondary expansion. Most patients were Whitaker class I (99% of ES, 95% of CVR); 5% of CVR patients were class II and 1% of ES patients were class III. Four syndromic patients presented without clear evidence of a syndrome, were treated by ES, and subsequently required secondary expansion for raised intracranial pressure.CONCLUSIONSES is an effective treatment for nonsyndromic SC with comparable head growth, aesthetic outcomes, and less morbidity relative to CVR. In the absence of a syndrome, secondary cranial expansion following ES is rarely required.