Sagittal synostosis has been successfully managed with numerous surgical techniques. Nevertheless, few data on long-term outcomes exist to justify use of one surgical technique over another. In this study, we compared children with surgically corrected sagittal synostosis to their age-matched control subjects to assess the longevity of their corrections. Furthermore, the outcomes of open repairs were compared with endoscopic repairs.Following institutional review board approval, three-dimensional photographs of patients who underwent surgical reconstruction for nonsyndromic sagittal synostosis were analyzed to determine biparietal and anterior-posterior diameter, circumference, cephalic index, cranial vault volume, cranial height, and forehead inclination. Thirteen patients who had undergone open repair, including 6 total cranial vault and 7 modified-pi reconstructions, and 6 patients who had undergone endoscopic strip craniectomy with barrel-stave osteotomies and postoperative helmeting were compared with nonsynostotic age-matched control subjects. Mean follow-up was 97.5 months after open and 48.9 months after endoscopic repair. Student t tests were used for analysis. In the second arm of this study, 33 patients who had undergone endoscopic repair were compared with the 13 patients who had undergone open repair; mean follow-up was 24.8 months after endoscopic repair. Linear regression models were used to adjust for age and sex.After comparing three-dimensional photographs of children who were more than 3 years postoperative from surgical correction for sagittal synostosis with their age-matched control subjects, no statistically significant differences were found in any of the measured parameters. In addition, no differences were detected between open reconstruction versus endoscopic repair, suggesting equivalence in final results for both procedures.
A variety of commercially available three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging systems are currently in use by craniofacial specialists. Little is known, however, about how measurement data generated from alternative 3D systems compare, specifically in terms of accuracy and precision. The purpose of this study was to compare anthropometric measurements obtained by way of two different digital 3D photogrammetry systems (Genex and 3dMD) as well as direct anthropometry and to evaluate intraobserver precision across these three methods. On a sample of 18 mannequin heads, 12 linear distances were measured twice by each method. A two-factor repeated measures analysis of variance was used to test simultaneously for mean differences in precision across methods. Additional descriptive statistics (e.g., technical error of measurement [TEM]) were used to quantify measurement error magnitude. Statistically significant (P < 0.05) mean differences were observed across methods for nine anthropometric variables; however, the magnitude of these differences was consistently at the submillimeter level. No significant differences were noted for precision. Moreover, the magnitude of imprecision was determined to be very small, with TEM scores well under 1 mm, and intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.98 to 1. Results indicate that overall mean differences across these three methods were small enough to be of little practical importance. In terms of intraobserver precision, all methods fared equally well. This study is the first attempt to simultaneously compare 3D surface imaging systems directly with one another and with traditional anthropometry. Results suggest that craniofacial surface data obtained by way of alternative 3D photogrammetric systems can be combined or compared statistically.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.