Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2010
Posterior cranial vault distraction osteogenesis in craniosynostosis: estimated increases in intracranial volume.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Serlo Willy S, Ylikontiola Leena P, Lähdesluoma Niina, Lappalainen Olli-Pekka, Korpi Jarkko, Verkasalo Jani, Sàndor George K B
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To study distraction osteogenesis of the posterior cranial vault in children requiring increased intracranial volume.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients were treated with cranial distractors. Five children had previously been operated for scaphocephaly and one child for Saether-Chotzen syndrome. Two patients had bilateral coronal suture synostosis with Muenke syndrome and two patients had Apert syndrome. At surgery, the cranial bones were mobilized, the head was widened during surgery, and the segments fixed to each other with distractors. Further expansion at a rate of 1 mm/day was performed over 2-4 weeks. The cranium was distracted posteriorly from 20 to 30 mm.
RESULTS: The patients all tolerated surgery and distraction well. In all cases, the parents were able to perform the distraction at home. There were no technical problems with the distraction devices. Two cases had minor cutaneous problems, where the distractor penetrated the skin. These cases responded to gentle local wound care measures. At the time of distractor removal, ossification had occurred sufficiently in one of these two cases. In the other case, the device was removed and replaced with a resorbable plate, without any harmful effect on the result. In all cases, sufficient expansion was achieved without causing more cosmetic deformity. Ossification occurred in all cases. This method seems effective, as the calculated increase in intracranial volume was a mean of 20.2% (range 10.2-28.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary series shows that cranial bone distraction is a useful method for cranial expansion with low morbidity in children with craniosynostosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients were treated with cranial distractors. Five children had previously been operated for scaphocephaly and one child for Saether-Chotzen syndrome. Two patients had bilateral coronal suture synostosis with Muenke syndrome and two patients had Apert syndrome. At surgery, the cranial bones were mobilized, the head was widened during surgery, and the segments fixed to each other with distractors. Further expansion at a rate of 1 mm/day was performed over 2-4 weeks. The cranium was distracted posteriorly from 20 to 30 mm.
RESULTS: The patients all tolerated surgery and distraction well. In all cases, the parents were able to perform the distraction at home. There were no technical problems with the distraction devices. Two cases had minor cutaneous problems, where the distractor penetrated the skin. These cases responded to gentle local wound care measures. At the time of distractor removal, ossification had occurred sufficiently in one of these two cases. In the other case, the device was removed and replaced with a resorbable plate, without any harmful effect on the result. In all cases, sufficient expansion was achieved without causing more cosmetic deformity. Ossification occurred in all cases. This method seems effective, as the calculated increase in intracranial volume was a mean of 20.2% (range 10.2-28.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary series shows that cranial bone distraction is a useful method for cranial expansion with low morbidity in children with craniosynostosis.