Skip to main content
Log in

Validation of cephalic index measurements in scaphocephaly

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Child's Nervous System Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The cephalic index (CI) of the head can be measured manually using a caliper, the original technique, but it is also possible to determine it using skull X-ray, 2DCT and 3DCT images, 3D photo and with help of plagiocephalometry (PCM).

Patients and methods

In this study, the manual caliper determination is statistically compared with other measuring methods for scaphocephaly patients (n = 39).

Results

The CI mean differences for the most representative data are sequentially 3.74, 2.16, 1.09 and 0.97 for the 2DCT, PCM, 3D photo and 3DCT techniques. The CI 2DCT values show a significant difference (p < 0.01) in reference to CI manually, while the other techniques show a p > 0.05.

Conclusion

The conclusions are that significantly different results are achieved when using 2DCT relative to the manual caliper determination. No significant difference is observed between the 3D techniques and the manual method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Brace RA (1977) Fitting straight lines to experimental data. Am J Physiol 233:R94–R99

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Christofides EA, Steinmann ME (2010) A novel anthropometric chart for craniofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg 21:352–357

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Farkas LG, Posnick JC, Hreczko TM (1992) Anthropometric growth study of the head. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 29:303–308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Frühwald J, Schicho KA, Figl M, Benesch T, Watzinger F et al (2008) Accuracy of craniofacial measurements: computed tomography and three-dimensional computed tomography compared with stereolithographic models. J Craniofac Surg 19:22–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hankinson TC, Fontana EJ, Anderson RC, Feldstein NA (2010) Surgical treatment of single-suture craniosynostosis: an argument for quantitative methods to evaluate cosmetic outcomes. J Neurosurg Pediatr 6:193–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Marcus JR, Domeshek LF, Das R, Marshall S, Nightingale R et al (2008) Objective three-dimensional analysis of cranial morphology. Eplasty 8:e20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marcus JR, Stokes TH, Mukundan S, Forrest CR (2006) Quantitative and qualitative assessment of morphology in sagittal synostosis: mid-sagittal vector analysis. J Craniofac Surg 17:680–686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Plank LH, Giavedoni B, Lombardo JR, Geil MD, Reisner A (2006) Comparison of infant head shape changes in deformational plagiocephaly following treatment with a cranial remolding orthosis using a noninvasive laser shape digitizer. J Craniofac Surg 17:1084–1091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ruiz-Correa S, Sze RW, Starr JR, Lin HT, Speltz ML et al (2006) New scaphocephaly severity indices of sagittal craniosynostosis: a comparative study with cranial index quantifications. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 43:211–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schaaf H, Pons-Kuehnemann J, Malik CY, Streckbein P, Preuss M et al (2010) Accuracy of three-dimensional photogrammetric images in non-synostotic cranial deformities. Neuropediatrics 41:24–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Shah MN, Kane AA, Petersen JD, Woo AS, Naidoo SD et al (2011) Endoscopically assisted versus open repair of sagittal craniosynostosis: the St. Louis Children’s Hospital experience. J Neurosurg Pediatr 8:165–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. van Adrichem LN, van Vlimmeren LA, Cadanova D, Helders PJ, Engelbert RH et al (2008) Validation of a simple method for measuring cranial deformities (plagiocephalometry). J Craniofac Surg 19:15–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. van Vlimmeren LA, Takken T, van Adrichem LN, van der Graaf Y, Helders PJ et al (2006) Plagiocephalometry: a non-invasive method to quantify asymmetry of the skull; a reliability study. Eur J Pediatr 165:149–157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wilbrand JF, Szczukowski A, Blecher JC, Pons-Kuehnemann J, Christophis P et al (2012) Objectification of cranial vault correction for craniosynostosis by three-dimensional photography. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 40(8):726–730

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilbrand JF, Wilbrand M, Pons-Kuehnemann J, Blecher JC, Christophis P et al (2011) Value and reliability of anthropometric measurements of cranial deformity in early childhood. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 39:24–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik J. van Lindert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Lindert, E.J., Siepel, F.J., Delye, H. et al. Validation of cephalic index measurements in scaphocephaly. Childs Nerv Syst 29, 1007–1014 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-013-2059-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-013-2059-y

Keywords

Navigation