MedElevator
Войти в исследования Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
Concurrent posterior vault expansion and extradural Chiari decompression in syndromic and non-syndromic craniosynostosis: a case series.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ryan Isabel A, Chang Ashley E, Tolley Philip D, Swanson Jordan W, Bartlett Scott P, Lang Shih-Shan, Heuer Gregory G, Taylor Jesse A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Chiari malformation (CM) may occur in patients with craniosynostosis, and the presence of both in anatomically similar locations allows for simultaneous treatment. In this study, we analyze concurrent posterior vault distraction osteogenesis (PVDO) or posterior vault reconstruction (PVR) with extradural Chiari decompression for the management of suspected increased intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with syndromic and atypical non-syndromic craniosynostosis.
METHODS: Patients who underwent concurrent PVDO/PVR and extradural Chiari decompression at a single institution from 2008 to 2024 were included. Of interest were patient/caregiver-reported symptomatology and radiographic findings related to CM reported by a board-certified neuroradiologist. Descriptive, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests were utilized for analysis.
RESULTS: Eight patients met the inclusion criteria. Fifty percent (n = 4) had syndromic craniosynostosis and 50% (n = 4) had non-syndromic craniosynostosis; half (n = 4) underwent PVDO, and half (n = 4) underwent PVR. One patient (12.5%) had a post-operative complication (distractor infection), with no long-term sequelae. One hundred percent (n = 8) had resolution of clinical symptoms at the first follow-up, and 85.7% (n = 6/7) at the last follow-up; 50.0% (n = 4) of patients had improvement, and 50.0% (n = 4) had a stable presentation of CM on post-operative imaging. While most patients with radiologic improvement in CM were in the PVDO group compared to PVR (75% (n = 3/4) vs. 25% (n = 1/4), p = 0.5), this study was underpowered to detect a significant difference between techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior vault expansion with extradural Chiari decompression in patients with concomitant suspected increased ICP and craniosynostosis appears safe and relatively effective at extended follow-up. Additional study of its long-term effects, patient selection, and comparison of PVDO vs PVR is warranted.
METHODS: Patients who underwent concurrent PVDO/PVR and extradural Chiari decompression at a single institution from 2008 to 2024 were included. Of interest were patient/caregiver-reported symptomatology and radiographic findings related to CM reported by a board-certified neuroradiologist. Descriptive, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests were utilized for analysis.
RESULTS: Eight patients met the inclusion criteria. Fifty percent (n = 4) had syndromic craniosynostosis and 50% (n = 4) had non-syndromic craniosynostosis; half (n = 4) underwent PVDO, and half (n = 4) underwent PVR. One patient (12.5%) had a post-operative complication (distractor infection), with no long-term sequelae. One hundred percent (n = 8) had resolution of clinical symptoms at the first follow-up, and 85.7% (n = 6/7) at the last follow-up; 50.0% (n = 4) of patients had improvement, and 50.0% (n = 4) had a stable presentation of CM on post-operative imaging. While most patients with radiologic improvement in CM were in the PVDO group compared to PVR (75% (n = 3/4) vs. 25% (n = 1/4), p = 0.5), this study was underpowered to detect a significant difference between techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: Posterior vault expansion with extradural Chiari decompression in patients with concomitant suspected increased ICP and craniosynostosis appears safe and relatively effective at extended follow-up. Additional study of its long-term effects, patient selection, and comparison of PVDO vs PVR is warranted.