Purpose: Early onset of minor suture fusion in syndromic craniosynostosis is associated with midface dysplasia and is a common indication for craniofacial surgery. However, the potential effects of fusion severity on craniofacial growth patterns are not well understood. This study seeks to describe the impact of minor suture fusion severity on midface morphology in Crouzon syndrome. Methods: Pre-operative computed tomography images (CT) of 63 patients with Crouzon syndrome and 63 normocepahlic controls were included. Degree of suture fusion was assessed for the frontosphenoidal, sphenethmoidal, sphenosquamosal, sphenopetrosal, spheno-occipital synchondrosis, frontoethmoidal, and zygomaticosphenoidal sutures. Each suture was graded on a 5-point scale. The sella (S), nasion (N), A point (A), basion (BA), and anterior nasal spine (ANS) landmarks were used to calculate the SNA angle, BA-ANS length of the lower midface, and N-S length of the upper midface. Multiple linear regressions were used to analyze data. Results: The mean age was 43 months and 44% were female. The control group was significantly older ( P < .01) than the patients with Crouzon syndrome. Advanced fusion of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis in Crouzon syndrome correlates with regression of the BA-ANS length by 0.563 mm per incremental increase in suture fusion ( P < .01). Additionally, the lower midface (BA-ANS) was restricted to a greater degree than the upper midface (N-S) with progressive suture fusion in all patient types with ratios of these rates ranging between 0.602 and 0.89 for the 7 sutures analyzed. Suture fusion severity did not impact the SNA angle in any of the analyses performed. Conclusion: The severity of sheno-occipital synchondrosis fusion in Crouzon syndrome contributes to midface hypoplasia. Similarly, all anterior skull base sutures limited lower midface growth to a greater degree than the upper midface.

BackgroundIncreasingly patients with unilateral breast cancer elect to undergo bilateral mastectomy with subsequent reconstruction. Studies have aimed to better identify the risks associated with performing mastectomy on the noncancerous breast. Our study aims to identify differences in complications between therapeutic and prophylactic mastectomy in patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction.MethodsA retrospective analysis of implant-based breast reconstruction from 2015 to 2020 at our institution was completed. Patients with less than 6-month follow-up after final implant placement had reconstruction using autologous flaps, expander or implant rupture, metastatic disease requiring device removal, or death before completion of reconstruction were excluded. McNemar test identified differences in incidence of complications for therapeutic and prophylactic breasts.ResultsAfter analysis of 215 patients, we observed no significant difference in incidence of infection, ischemia, or hematoma between the therapeutic and prophylactic sides. Therapeutic mastectomies had higher odds of seroma formation (P = 0.03; odds ratio, 3.500; 95% confidence interval, 1.099–14.603). Radiation treatment status was analyzed for patients with seroma; 14% of patients unilateral seroma of the therapeutic side underwent radiation (2 of 14), compared with 25% patients with unilateral seroma of the prophylactic side (1 of 4).ConclusionsFor patients undergoing mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction, the therapeutic mastectomy side has an increased risk of seroma formation.