Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The assessment of relationship between the skull base development and the severity of frontal plagiocephaly after bilateral fronto-orbital advancement in the early life

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

Abstract

Purpose

The deformation of the skull base in patients with unilateral frontal plagiocephaly (UFP) is well known, but the mechanism is not still clear. We analyzed the skull base in the patients with UFP who underwent fronto-orbital advancement (FOA) in the early life during the last decade.

Methods

We assessed the treatment results and outcome of FOA performed in six patients, four girls and two boys younger than 2 years, in the last decade. Also, the basal cranium’s angles were measured by 3D reconstruction images on computed tomography (CT) scan.

Results

The mean patients’ age at FOAs was 11 months. Two cases were classified as grade 2A, two cases as grade 2B, and two cases as grade 3 (the classification of Di Rocco and Velardi). The ethmoidal axis was deviated a mean of 8.2° to the affected side. The mean angle between the petrosal pyramids and the midline (anterior-petrosal-sagittal angle, APSA) was 75.3° on the affected side and 66.2° on the normal side. The mean difference of APSA was 9.2°. On the follow-up CT images 5 years after surgery, the deviations of the ethmoidal axis clearly decreased, 5.7°, but the differences of APSA did not change, 8.8°.

Conclusions

The midline distortion of anterior skull base should be considered to be spontaneously corrected during the follow-up periods in patients with all types of UFP who underwent FOA, unlike posterior skull base in the patients with grades 2B and 3 classification.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kane AA, Kim YO, Eaton A, Pilgram TK, Marsh JL, Zonneveld F, Larsen P, Kreiborg S (2000) Quantification of osseous facial dysmorphology in untreated unilateral coronal synostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(2):251–258

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hardesty RA, Marsh JL, Vannier MW (1991) Unicoronal synostosis. A surgical intervention. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2(3):641–653

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stricker M, Van der Meulen JC, Raphael B (1990) Craniofacial malformations. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 234–242

    Google Scholar 

  4. Marianetti TM, Gasparini G, Moro A, Alimonti V, Cervelli D, Boniello R, Di Rocco C, Saponaro G, Pelo S (2011) Nasal and ethmoidal alterations in anterior synostotic plagiocephaly. J Craniofac Surg 22(2):509–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Di Rocco C, Paternoster G, Caldarelli M, Massimi L, Tamburrini G (2012) Anterior plagiocephaly: epidemiology, clinical findings, diagnosis, and classification. A review. Childs Nerv Syst 28:1413–1422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Di Rocco C, Velardi F (1988) Nosographic identification and classification of plagiocephaly. Childs Nerv Syst 4(1):9–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pelo S, Tamburrini G, Marianetti TM, Saponaro G, Moro A, Gasparini G, Di Rocco C (2011) Correlations between the abnormal development of the skull base and facial skeleton growth in anterior synostotic plagiocephaly: the predictive value of a classification based on CT scan examination. Childs Nerv Syst 27(9):1431–1443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hansen M, Padwa B, Scott RM, Stieg P, Mulliken JB (1997) Synostotic frontal plagiocephaly: anthropometric comparison of three techniques for surgical correction. Plast Recontr Surg 100:1387–1395

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. McCarthy JG, Glasberg SB, Cutting CB, Epstein FJ, Grayson BH, Ruff G, Thorne CH, Wisoff J, Zide BM (1995) Twenty-year’s experience with early surgery for craniosynostosis. II. The craniofacial unsolved problems. Plast Reconstr Surg 96:284–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Selber JC, Brooks C, Kurichi JE, Remmen T, Sonnad SS, Whitaker LA (2008) Long-term results following fronto-orbital reconstruction in nonsyndromic unicoronal synostosis. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:251e–260e

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mesa JM, Fang F, Murazko KM, Buchman S (2011) Reconstruction of unicoronal plagiocephaly with a hypercorrection surgical technique. Neurosurg Focus 31:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hilling DE, Mathijssen IMJ, Mulder PGH, Vaandrager JM (2006) Long-term aesthetic results of frontoorbital correction for frontal plagiocephaly. J Neurosurg 105(1 Suppl Ped):21–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Matushita H, Alonso N, Cardeal DD, de Andrade F (2012) Frontal-orbital advancement for the management of anterior plagiocephaly. Childs Nerv Syst 28:1423–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bentley RP, Sgouros S, Natarajan K, Dover MS, Hockley AD (2002) Changes in orbital volume during childhood in cases of craniosynostosis. J Neurosurg 96(4):747–754

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fearon JA, Ruotolo RA, Kolar JC (2009) Single sutural craniosynostoses: surgical outcomes and long-term growth. Plast Reconstr Surg 123(2):635–642

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tatsuki Oyoshi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oyoshi, T., Fujio, S., Bohara, M. et al. The assessment of relationship between the skull base development and the severity of frontal plagiocephaly after bilateral fronto-orbital advancement in the early life. Childs Nerv Syst 30, 155–159 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-013-2182-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-013-2182-9

Keywords

Navigation