Clinical Reference Strategy for the Selection of Surgical Treatment for Nonsyndromic Sagittal Craniosynostosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of comprehensive comparative evidence regarding the effectiveness, intraoperative management, and safety of different surgical procedures for treating nonsyndromic sagittal synostosis. This study aims to evaluate existing clinical studies to provide evidence-based guidance for clinical practice.

METHODS

The authors performed a comprehensive search of 5 databases up to August 2024. Key outcomes included clinical effectiveness, measured by cephalic index (CI), and intraoperative management and safety indicators, such as intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Direct and indirect effects, along with treatment rankings, were assessed using Bayesian pairwise and network meta-analysis models.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with 1436 patients were included, and 4 network meta-analysis models were used to compare 5 surgical techniques: open strip craniectomy (OSS), calvarial vault remodeling (CVR), spring-mediated cranioplasty (SMC), endoscopic strip craniectomy (ESC), and endoscopic spring-mediated cranioplasty (ESMC). No significant differences in postoperative CI were found between the surgical methods. However, CVR was associated with significantly greater blood loss, longer operative time, and longer hospital stays compared with OSS, SMC, and ESC.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence does not demonstrate a clear superiority of one surgical method over another, with comparable treatment outcomes overall. However, CVR carries higher risks, and the choice of surgical approach should be individualized based on patient-specific factors and clinical judgment.