ArticleScientific reports2021
Predicting and comparing three corrective techniques for sagittal craniosynostosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimising Fronto-Orbital Distraction for Management of Unicoronal Craniosynostosis.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Predicting surgical outcomes in spring assisted cranioplasty via finite element analysis and animal experiments.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Towards a radiation free numerical modelling framework to predict spring assisted correction of scaphocephaly.Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Dura-based automated vault expansion remodelling (DAVE-R): automated planning of volume expansion in fronto-orbital advancement for trigonocephaly.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Evaluating mechanical benefit of wedge osteotomies in endoscopic surgery for sagittal synostosis using patient-specific 3D-printed models.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Understanding the influence of surgical parameters on craniofacial surgery outcomes: a computational study.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Spring-Assisted Surgery of Unilambdoid Craniosynostosis.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2024Article
- Review
- Normal human craniofacial growth and development from 0 to 4 years.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- Automated surgical planning in spring-assisted sagittal craniosynostosis correction using finite element analysis and machine learning.PloS one · 2023Article
- A Computational Framework to Predict Calvarial Growth: Optimising Management of Sagittal Craniosynostosis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Isolated Effects of Bone, Spring and Surgical Parameters on the Surgical Outcome in Spring-Assisted Sagittal Synostosis Correction.Healthcare technology lettersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sagittal synostosis is the most occurring form of craniosynostosis, resulting in calvarial deformation and possible long-term neurocognitive deficits. Several surgical techniques have been developed to correct these issues. Debates as to the most optimal approach are still ongoing. Finite element method is a computational tool that's shown to assist with the management of craniosynostosis. The aim of this study was to compare and predict the outcomes of three reconstruction methods for sagittal craniosynostosis. Here, a generic finite element model was developed based on a patient at 4 months of age and was virtually reconstructed under all three different techniques. Calvarial growth was simulated to predict the skull morphology and the impact of different reconstruction techniques on the brain growth up to 60 months of age. Predicted morphology was then compared with in vivo and literature data. Our results show a promising resemblance to morphological outcomes at follow up. Morphological characteristics between considered techniques were also captured in our predictions. Pressure outcomes across the brain highlight the potential impact that different techniques have on growth. This study lays the foundation for further investigation into additional reconstructive techniques for sagittal synostosis with the long-term vision of optimizing the management of craniosynostosis.
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.