Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31082848›Full record

ArticleAnnals of plastic surgery2019

Long-Term Characterization of Cranial Defects After Surgical Correction for Single-Suture Craniosynostosis.

Gary B Skolnick, Sindhoora Murthy, Kamlesh B Patel, Zhiyang Huang, Sybill D Naidoo, Tao Ju, Matthew D Smyth, Albert S Woo

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of plastic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Non-syndromic craniosynostosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. A preliminary analysis of replicating the biomechanics of helmet therapy for sagittal craniosynostosis.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Gary B Skolnick
Sindhoora MurthyDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.
Kamlesh B Patel
Zhiyang HuangDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO.
Sybill D Naidoo
Tao JuDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.
Matthew D Smyth
Albert S WooDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.
Washington University in St. Louis · USBrown University · USUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USUniversity of Maryland Medical Center · US

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCraniosynostosis is typically corrected surgically within the first year of life through cranial vault reconstruction. These procedures often leave open calvarial defects at the time of surgery, which are anticipated to close over time in a large proportion of cases. However, residual calvarial defects may result as long-term sequelae from cranial vault remodeling. When larger defects are present, they may necessitate further reconstruction for closure.Better understanding of the calvarial osseous healing process may help to identify which defects will resolve or shrink to acceptable size and which will require further surgery. Our study aims to assess the long-term changes in defect size after cranial vault reconstruction for craniosynostosis.

methodsOne-year postoperative and long-term computed tomography scans were retrieved from the craniofacial anomalies archive. Analysis used custom software. All defects above the size of 1 cm were analyzed and tracked for calvarial location, surface area, and circularity. Monte Carlo simulation was performed to model the effect of initial defect size on the rate of defect closure.

resultsWe analyzed a total of 74 defects. The mean ± SD initial defect surface area was 3.27 ± 3.40 cm. The mean ± SD final defect surface area was 1.71 ± 2.54 cm. The mean ± SD percent decrease was 55.06% ± 28.99%. There was a significant difference in the percentage decrease of defects in the parietal and frontoparietal locations: 68.4% and 43.7%, respectively (P = 0.001). Monte Carlo simulation results suggest that less than 10% of defects above the size of 9 cm will close to the size of 2.5 cm or less.

conclusionsWe describe and make available a novel validated method of measuring cranial defects. We find that the large majority of initial defects greater than 9 cm remain at least 1 in in size (2.5 cm) 1 year postoperatively. In addition, there appear to be regional differences in closure rates across the cranium, with frontoparietal defects closing more slowly than those in the parietal region. This information will aid surgeons in the decision-making process regarding cranioplasty after craniosynostosis correction.

Indexed as

Imaging, Three-DimensionalBone TransplantationCohort StudiesCraniosynostosesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfantMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicMonte Carlo MethodPlastic Surgery ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSkull

Identifiers

PMID31082848
PMCPMC6519078
OpenAlexW2946495110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.