Lauren E Sullivan, Alexandra Alving-Trinh, Nicholas O'Sick, Alexander Nixon, Christopher M Bonfield, Michael S Golinko, Matthew E Pontell
{"title":"美国颅缝闭锁手术实践模式:我们在做什么以及我们是如何做的?","authors":"Lauren E Sullivan, Alexandra Alving-Trinh, Nicholas O'Sick, Alexander Nixon, Christopher M Bonfield, Michael S Golinko, Matthew E Pontell","doi":"10.3171/2024.10.FOCUS24572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The surgical management of craniosynostosis varies without consensus on technique or standard outcomes reporting. The authors of this study aimed to investigate current surgical management of craniosynostosis in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred seventy-five surgeons actively treating craniosynostosis in the United States were surveyed. The results from a 28-item instrument were analyzed according to surgeon specialty, surgeon tenure, and geographic location of practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall response rate was 47.6% (131/275), and final analyses included 58 plastic and reconstructive surgeons and 69 neurosurgeons from 79 different institutions. The majority of surgeons used internal data registries (65.4%); however, only 17.4% of neurosurgeons and 34.5% of plastic surgeons (p = 0.04) contributed to national or international registries. Neurosurgeons were more likely to offer endoscopic strip craniectomy for unicoronal craniosynostosis (75.4% vs 50.0%, p = 0.05) and unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (69.6% vs 48.3%, p = 0.018). Plastic surgeons were more likely to offer spring-assisted cranioplasty for bilambdoid synostosis (20.7% vs 7.2%, p = 0.036) and most other sutures. For all sutures, open cranial vault remodeling remains the most frequently offered technique. Plastic surgeons more often selected the surgical technique based on physical examination (86.2% vs 68.1%, p = 0.02) and recognized a \"gold-standard\" treatment (51.7% vs 17.4%, p < 0.001). Region did not significantly impact the techniques offered. Compared to surgeons with fewer years of experience, those with 6 or more years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.002) and those with more than 10 years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for bilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.011).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The authors present the largest description of current craniosynostosis practices in the United States. Reported surgical offerings were overall similar across specialties, regions, and years of surgeon experience. Nearly all surveyed surgeons continue to offer open cranial vault remodeling as an option for all included craniosynostosis variations. Endoscopic strip craniectomy is the second most proposed technique for most sutures, but distraction methods are similarly or more frequently offered in cases of bilateral and multisuture synostoses. Plastic surgeons also report greater spring-assisted repair offers than neurosurgeons, whereas the longest practicing surgeons are less likely to offer open repair in lambdoid cases. Encouraging further contributions to national databases, such as that of the Synostosis Research Group, may provide robust outcome data that can help to identify best practices for managing this complicated pathology.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"58 1","pages":"E2"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Craniosynostosis surgery practice patterns in the United States: what are we doing and how are we doing it?\",\"authors\":\"Lauren E Sullivan, Alexandra Alving-Trinh, Nicholas O'Sick, Alexander Nixon, Christopher M Bonfield, Michael S Golinko, Matthew E Pontell\",\"doi\":\"10.3171/2024.10.FOCUS24572\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The surgical management of craniosynostosis varies without consensus on technique or standard outcomes reporting. The authors of this study aimed to investigate current surgical management of craniosynostosis in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred seventy-five surgeons actively treating craniosynostosis in the United States were surveyed. The results from a 28-item instrument were analyzed according to surgeon specialty, surgeon tenure, and geographic location of practice.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall response rate was 47.6% (131/275), and final analyses included 58 plastic and reconstructive surgeons and 69 neurosurgeons from 79 different institutions. The majority of surgeons used internal data registries (65.4%); however, only 17.4% of neurosurgeons and 34.5% of plastic surgeons (p = 0.04) contributed to national or international registries. Neurosurgeons were more likely to offer endoscopic strip craniectomy for unicoronal craniosynostosis (75.4% vs 50.0%, p = 0.05) and unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (69.6% vs 48.3%, p = 0.018). Plastic surgeons were more likely to offer spring-assisted cranioplasty for bilambdoid synostosis (20.7% vs 7.2%, p = 0.036) and most other sutures. For all sutures, open cranial vault remodeling remains the most frequently offered technique. Plastic surgeons more often selected the surgical technique based on physical examination (86.2% vs 68.1%, p = 0.02) and recognized a \\\"gold-standard\\\" treatment (51.7% vs 17.4%, p < 0.001). Region did not significantly impact the techniques offered. Compared to surgeons with fewer years of experience, those with 6 or more years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.002) and those with more than 10 years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for bilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.011).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The authors present the largest description of current craniosynostosis practices in the United States. Reported surgical offerings were overall similar across specialties, regions, and years of surgeon experience. Nearly all surveyed surgeons continue to offer open cranial vault remodeling as an option for all included craniosynostosis variations. Endoscopic strip craniectomy is the second most proposed technique for most sutures, but distraction methods are similarly or more frequently offered in cases of bilateral and multisuture synostoses. Plastic surgeons also report greater spring-assisted repair offers than neurosurgeons, whereas the longest practicing surgeons are less likely to offer open repair in lambdoid cases. Encouraging further contributions to national databases, such as that of the Synostosis Research Group, may provide robust outcome data that can help to identify best practices for managing this complicated pathology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19187,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgical focus\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"E2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgical focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.10.FOCUS24572\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.10.FOCUS24572","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:颅缝闭锁的外科治疗方法在技术或标准结果报告上没有共识。本研究的作者旨在调查目前美国颅缝闭锁的外科治疗。方法:对美国275名积极治疗颅缝闭锁的外科医生进行调查。根据外科医生的专业、任期和执业的地理位置,对28项仪器的结果进行分析。结果:总有效率为47.6%(131/275),最终分析了来自79家不同机构的58名整形重建外科医生和69名神经外科医生。大多数外科医生使用内部数据注册(65.4%);然而,只有17.4%的神经外科医生和34.5%的整形外科医生(p = 0.04)对国家或国际注册做出了贡献。神经外科医生更倾向于为单冠状颅缝闭锁(75.4%比50.0%,p = 0.05)和单侧小lambdoid颅缝闭锁(69.6%比48.3%,p = 0.018)提供内镜下条形颅骨切除术。整形外科医生更倾向于采用弹簧辅助颅骨成形术治疗双胆管关节闭锁(20.7% vs 7.2%, p = 0.036)和大多数其他缝合。对于所有缝合,开放颅拱顶重塑仍然是最常用的技术。整形外科医生更多地根据体格检查选择手术技术(86.2%对68.1%,p = 0.02),并认为这是“金标准”治疗(51.7%对17.4%,p < 0.001)。区域对所提供的技术没有显著影响。与经验较少的外科医生相比,具有6年或以上经验的外科医生不太可能为单侧小羔羊样颅缝闭闭提供颅穹窿重塑(p = 0.002),具有10年以上经验的外科医生不太可能为双侧小羔羊样颅缝闭闭提供颅穹窿重塑(p = 0.011)。结论:作者提供了美国目前颅缝闭合实践的最大描述。报告的手术产品在专业、地区和外科医生经验方面总体相似。几乎所有接受调查的外科医生继续提供开放颅拱顶重塑作为所有包括颅缝闭塞变异的选择。内窥镜条形颅骨切除术是大多数缝合线的第二大建议技术,但牵张方法类似或更常用于双侧和多缝合线滑膜紧闭的病例。整形外科医生也报告比神经外科医生提供更多的弹簧辅助修复,而执业时间最长的外科医生不太可能在小兔唇病例中提供开放式修复。鼓励对国家数据库的进一步贡献,如Synostosis研究组的数据库,可能会提供可靠的结果数据,有助于确定管理这种复杂病理的最佳做法。
Craniosynostosis surgery practice patterns in the United States: what are we doing and how are we doing it?
Objective: The surgical management of craniosynostosis varies without consensus on technique or standard outcomes reporting. The authors of this study aimed to investigate current surgical management of craniosynostosis in the United States.
Methods: Two hundred seventy-five surgeons actively treating craniosynostosis in the United States were surveyed. The results from a 28-item instrument were analyzed according to surgeon specialty, surgeon tenure, and geographic location of practice.
Results: The overall response rate was 47.6% (131/275), and final analyses included 58 plastic and reconstructive surgeons and 69 neurosurgeons from 79 different institutions. The majority of surgeons used internal data registries (65.4%); however, only 17.4% of neurosurgeons and 34.5% of plastic surgeons (p = 0.04) contributed to national or international registries. Neurosurgeons were more likely to offer endoscopic strip craniectomy for unicoronal craniosynostosis (75.4% vs 50.0%, p = 0.05) and unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (69.6% vs 48.3%, p = 0.018). Plastic surgeons were more likely to offer spring-assisted cranioplasty for bilambdoid synostosis (20.7% vs 7.2%, p = 0.036) and most other sutures. For all sutures, open cranial vault remodeling remains the most frequently offered technique. Plastic surgeons more often selected the surgical technique based on physical examination (86.2% vs 68.1%, p = 0.02) and recognized a "gold-standard" treatment (51.7% vs 17.4%, p < 0.001). Region did not significantly impact the techniques offered. Compared to surgeons with fewer years of experience, those with 6 or more years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for unilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.002) and those with more than 10 years of experience were less likely to offer cranial vault remodeling for bilateral lambdoid craniosynostosis (p = 0.011).
Conclusions: The authors present the largest description of current craniosynostosis practices in the United States. Reported surgical offerings were overall similar across specialties, regions, and years of surgeon experience. Nearly all surveyed surgeons continue to offer open cranial vault remodeling as an option for all included craniosynostosis variations. Endoscopic strip craniectomy is the second most proposed technique for most sutures, but distraction methods are similarly or more frequently offered in cases of bilateral and multisuture synostoses. Plastic surgeons also report greater spring-assisted repair offers than neurosurgeons, whereas the longest practicing surgeons are less likely to offer open repair in lambdoid cases. Encouraging further contributions to national databases, such as that of the Synostosis Research Group, may provide robust outcome data that can help to identify best practices for managing this complicated pathology.