Cited by 17Craniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsCleft Lip and Palate ResearchPectus Deformity Diagnosis and Treatment

Sagittal synostosis: II. Cranial morphology and growth after the modified pi-plasty

Guimarães-Ferreira, José, Gewalli, Fredrik, David, Lisa, Darvann, Tron A., Hermann, Nuno V., Kreiborg, Sven, Friede, Hans, Lauritzen, Claes G. K.·2006·Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery

Abstract

The aim of this study was to characterise the postoperative cranial growth and morphology after a modified pi-plasty for sagittal synostosis. The shape of the skull of 82 patients with isolated premature synostosis of the sagittal suture (SS group) operated on with a modified pi-plasty was studied longitudinally. Forty-five children with unilateral incomplete cleft lip (UICL), evaluated longitudinally at the ages of 2.4 and 23.2 months were used as controls. A standardised radiocephalometric technique was used for image acquisition. The radiocephalograms were analysed using a modification of a method developed by Kreiborg, which included the digitisation of 89 landmarks of the calvaria, cranial base, and orbit (43 in the lateral and 46 in the frontal projections), the production of mean shape plots for each group, and the intergroup comparison of a series of 78 variables (linear distance between selected landmarks, and angles defined by groups of three landmarks). Paired and unpaired t tests were used to assess the differences between the variables studied. These were accepted as significant for values of p<0.01 and were presented as coloured segments or areas in the respective plots. In a comparative analysis with the mean UICL lateral plots, the mean preoperative lateral plots of the study group (SS) showed that the anterior slope of the forehead was more pronounced and it was also more convex. The vertex area was located more anteriorly and was less convex. The occipital curvature was more prominent. Comparison of the mean frontal plots showed a deficiency in convexity and lateral projection of the upper parietal regions, and the line of maximum skull width was lower. The postoperative mean lateral plots of the study group showed a correction of the exaggerated anterior inclination of the forehead and a reduction of the abnormal occipital convexity. However, there was little change in the vertex region and it remained flatter than in the control group. In the mean frontal plots, the increase in convexity and in the lateral projection of the upper parietal areas led to a shape that was similar to that of the UICL group. The mean (SD) cephalic index changed from 64.9% (1.8%) to 71.4% (3.5%) (p<0.001). The longitudinal comparison between the mean postoperative plots at 3 and 5 years of age showed that there had been little change in cranial shape. In conclusion, after a modified pi-plasty for sagittal synostosis, significant objective changes in cranial shape towards normality were produced. The postoperative profile cranial shape was improved except in the vertex area, which remained flatter than normal. In the frontal projection an almost normal shape was obtained. The postoperative cranial shape obtained at 3 years of age had remained stable at the age of 5 years.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02844310600610280

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guimarães-Ferreira, J., Gewalli, F., David, L., Darvann, T. A., Hermann, N. V., Kreiborg, S., Friede, H., & Lauritzen, C. G. K.
Affiliations
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
  • Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (US)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery
Published
2006-01
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
200-209
ISSN
0284-4311 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1965216313
Cited by
17
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Craniofacial Disorders and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Cleft Lip and Palate Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pectus Deformity Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
skull morphology, cranial growth, skull shape, cephalic index, vertex, children, longitudinal follow-up, craniofacial growth pattern
MeSH terms
Cephalometry, Child, Child, Preschool, Craniotomy, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Infant, Longitudinal Studies, Radiography, Skull, Synostosis, Case-Control Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review