Cited by 29Craniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsPectus Deformity Diagnosis and TreatmentNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications

A comparison of endoscopic strip craniectomy and pi craniectomy for treatment of sagittal craniosynostosis

Magge, Suresh N., Bartolozzi, Arthur R., Almeida, Neil D., Tsering, Deki, Myseros, John S., Oluigbo, Chima O., Rogers, Gary F., Keating, Robert F.·2019·Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Sagittal craniosynostosis is managed with a wide variety of operative strategies. The current investigation compares the clinical outcomes of two widely performed techniques: pi craniectomy and minimally invasive endoscopic strip craniectomy (ESC) followed by helmet therapy. METHODS: This IRB-approved retrospective study examined patients diagnosed with nonsyndromic, single-suture sagittal craniosynostosis treated with either pi craniectomy or ESC. Included patients had a minimum postoperative follow-up of 5 months. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients met the inclusion criteria (pi 21 patients, ESC 30 patients). Compared to patients who underwent ESC, the pi patients were older at the time of surgery (mean age 5.06 vs 3.11 months). The mean follow-up time was 23.2 months for ESC patients and 31.4 months for pi patients. Initial cranial index (CI) was similar between the groups, but postoperatively the ESC patients experienced a 12.3% mean increase in CI (from 0.685 to 0.767) compared to a 5.34% increase for the pi patients (from 0.684 to 0.719), and this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). Median hospital length of stay (1 vs 2 days) and operative duration (69.5 vs 93.3 minutes) were significantly less for ESC (p < 0.001 for both). The ESC patients showed a trend toward better results when surgery was done at younger ages. Craniectomy width in ESC cases was positively associated with CI improvement (slope of linear regression = 0.69, p = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: While both techniques effectively treated sagittal craniosynostosis, ESC showed superior results compared to pi craniectomy. ESC showed a trend for better outcomes when done at younger ages, although the trend did not reach statistical significance. A wider craniectomy width (up to 2 cm) was associated with better outcomes than smaller craniectomy widths among the ESC patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3171/2019.1.peds18203

Cites

32 of 32 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
Magge, S. N., Bartolozzi, A. R., Almeida, N. D., Tsering, D., Myseros, J. S., Oluigbo, C. O., Rogers, G. F., & Keating, R. F.
Affiliations
  • George Washington University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Divisions of Neurosurgery and
  • Children's National (US)
Venue
Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics
Published
2019-06
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
708-714
ISSN
  • 1933-0707 (ISSN-L)
  • 1933-0715
OpenAlex
W2939389309
Cited by
29
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Craniofacial Disorders and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pectus Deformity Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Keywords
sagittal craniosynostosis, endoscopic strip craniectomy, nonsyndromic craniosynostosis, helmet therapy, cranial index, timing of surgery, pediatric neurosurgery

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