ReviewJournal of Korean Neurosurgical Society2016
Physiological Changes and Clinical Implications of Syndromic Craniosynostosis.
Review in Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgery of craniosynostosis: a historical review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Cranial bone microarchitecture in a mouse model for syndromic craniosynostosis.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Syndromic Craniosynostosis: A Comprehensive Review.Cureus · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Syndromic craniosynostosis has severe cranial stenosis and deformity, combined with hypoplastic maxillary bone and other developmental skeletal lesions. Among these various lesions, upper air way obstruction by hypoplastic maxillary bone could be the first life-threatening condition after birth. Aggressive cranial vault expansion for severely deformed cranial vaults due to multiple synostoses is necessary even in infancy, to normalize the intracranial pressure. Fronto-orbital advancement (FOA) is recommended for patients with hypoplastic anterior part of cranium induced by bicoronal and/or metopic synostoses, and posterior cranial vault expansion is recommended for those with flattening of the posterior part of the cranium by lambdoid synostosis. Although sufficient spontaneous reshaping of the cranium can be expected by expansive cranioplasty, keeping the cranial bone flap expanded sufficiently is often difficult when the initial expansion is performed during infancy. So far distraction osteogenesis (DO) is the only method to make it possible and to provide low rates of re-expansion of the cranial vault. DO is quite beneficial for both FOA and posterior cranial vault expansion, compared with the conventional methods. Associated hydrocephalus and chronic tonsillar herniation due to lambdoid synostosis can be surgically treatable. Abnormal venous drainages from the intracranial space and air way obstruction should be always considered at any surgical procedures. Neurosurgeons have to know well about the managements not only of the deformed cranial vault and the associated brain lesions but also of other multiple skeletal lesions associated with syndromic craniosynostosis, to improve treatment outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.