Home  -  About us  -  Editorial board  -  Search  -  Ahead of print  -  Current issue  -  Archives  -  Instructions  -  Subscribe  -  Contacts  -  Advertise - Login 
 
 
     
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 4-7

Experience with craniosynostosis treatment using posterior cranial vault distraction osteogenesis


1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu; Regea Institute for Regenerative Medicine, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland
3 Department of Neurosurgery, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
4 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland

Correspondence Address:
George K Sándor
Aapistie 3, University of Oulu, 90014-Oulu
Finland
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/2231-0746.95307

PMID: 23482323

Rights and Permissions

Background: Craniosynostosis compromises the cranial vault volume, severely impede growth, and may lead to increased intracranial pressure (ICP). Posterior cranial vault (PCV) distraction osteogenesis (DO) offers an excellent treatment opportunity for this condition. This article intends to describe the outcomes of PCV DO. Materials and Methods: Nine males and seven female children indicated for PCV DO were included in the study. The single vector distraction devices with quick-disconnect distraction rods, a type of miniaturized hardware, was used in all cases. Result: Seven of the 16 patients had a history of one or more prior cranioplasty. All reoperations in this series were performed for the indication of raised ICP including five of the scaphocephaly patients and the syndromic patients. Clinical signs of raised ICP were present in all patients with either measured raised intracranial pressure or those with clinical signs of raised ICP preoperatively. There was substantial decrease in the ICP postoperatively. Discussion: The outcomes of this study were encouraging. Placing the distractor stems as flat as possible against the outer layer of the cranial bone seems to be a very important maneuver. This keeps the distractor stem less proud and less likely to sustain future trauma. Removal of the distractor stems keeps the devices further away from the risk of later traumatic dislodgement. Moreover, miniaturized distractors allow precise control of the rate and the amount of distraction.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed8192    
    Printed216    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded616    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 17    

Recommend this journal