ReviewAsian journal of neurosurgery2024
The Role of Helmet Therapy in Craniosynostosis: A Systematic Review.
Review in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the impact of helmet therapy (HT) as a treatment for craniosynostosis, with a focus on the outcomes of skull morphology, reoperation rate, complications of HT, and quality of life of patients who receive it. A systematic literature review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The review utilized the PICO format: Does HT following strip craniectomy (SC) improve outcomes (outcome) compared to SC alone (comparison) in patients undergoing craniosynostosis correction (intervention)? Searches were performed from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2022, using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ovid Medline databases. Study quality was evaluated using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) quality assessment scale. Fourteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. Among these, 438 patients underwent SC-HT, while 104 patients underwent SC without HT. The preoperative cephalic indices for sagittal craniosynostosis in the HT and non-HT groups were 66.8 and 67.8, respectively, which improved postoperatively to 75 and 76.2, respectively. Limited long-term follow-up hindered a definitive assessment of reoperation rates. Complication rates related to HT were low at approximately 2.9%, primarily consisting of skin irritation. Parental satisfaction was high, correlating with a strong compliance rate. Existing literature does not demonstrate a clear superiority between SC with or without HT for treating nonsyndromic sagittal craniosynostosis. Outcomes appear comparable, but evidence is constrained by the predominance of single-center retrospective studies with limited methodological rigor. There is a pressing need for international multicenter trials to furnish more robust and generalizable findings.
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.