Margaret A Bello, Patrick F Mercho, Salil Gupta, Mariah Shirrell, Khoa D Tran, Emma J Cordes, Sunil Tholpady, Laurie L Ackerman, Katelyn G Makar
{"title":"使用 FACE-Q 颅颌面模块对颅穹重塑和带状颅骨切除术后患者报告结果的比较分析。","authors":"Margaret A Bello, Patrick F Mercho, Salil Gupta, Mariah Shirrell, Khoa D Tran, Emma J Cordes, Sunil Tholpady, Laurie L Ackerman, Katelyn G Makar","doi":"10.1097/SCS.0000000000010857","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The debate continues among craniofacial surgeons regarding the effectiveness of strip craniectomy (SC) compared with cranial vault remodeling (CVR) in achieving optimal functional and aesthetic outcomes in patients with single-suture craniosynostosis. This study aimed to compare long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between SC and CVR procedures at a single institution using the validated FACE-Q Craniofacial module.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients older than or equal to 8 years of age and parents of patients younger than 8 years of age who underwent SC or CVR for single-suture craniosynostosis were eligible. Patients with <2 years of follow-up, lambdoid synostosis, and syndromes were excluded. Primary endpoints were PROs as measured by the FACE-Q, with higher scores indicating increased health-related quality of life. Linear regression was used to control for covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-two participants completed the module (response rate 33.3%). SC was performed in 29 patients (46.8%), and CVR in 33 patients (53.2%). On unadjusted bivariate analysis, SC patients had higher eye (P=0.03) and forehead (P=0.05) scores. On regression analysis, controlling for sex, race, craniosynostosis type, and follow-up, there were no significant differences between operation types in any domain. Metopic and sagittal synostosis were associated with higher Eye (metopic: 17.61, P=0.049; sagittal: 41.44, P<0.001) and Head scores (metopic: 48.12, P=0.001; sagittal: 49.35, P<0.001), and sagittal synostosis was associated with higher Face (38.16, P<0.001), Forehead (55.93, P<0.001), and Nose scores (19.28, P=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>From patients' and parents' perspectives at a single institution, SC and CVR were equivalent regarding aesthetics and health-related quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":15462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Patient-reported Outcomes After Cranial Vault Remodeling and Strip Craniectomy With the FACE-Q Craniofacial Module.\",\"authors\":\"Margaret A Bello, Patrick F Mercho, Salil Gupta, Mariah Shirrell, Khoa D Tran, Emma J Cordes, Sunil Tholpady, Laurie L Ackerman, Katelyn G Makar\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SCS.0000000000010857\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The debate continues among craniofacial surgeons regarding the effectiveness of strip craniectomy (SC) compared with cranial vault remodeling (CVR) in achieving optimal functional and aesthetic outcomes in patients with single-suture craniosynostosis. This study aimed to compare long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between SC and CVR procedures at a single institution using the validated FACE-Q Craniofacial module.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients older than or equal to 8 years of age and parents of patients younger than 8 years of age who underwent SC or CVR for single-suture craniosynostosis were eligible. Patients with <2 years of follow-up, lambdoid synostosis, and syndromes were excluded. Primary endpoints were PROs as measured by the FACE-Q, with higher scores indicating increased health-related quality of life. Linear regression was used to control for covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-two participants completed the module (response rate 33.3%). SC was performed in 29 patients (46.8%), and CVR in 33 patients (53.2%). On unadjusted bivariate analysis, SC patients had higher eye (P=0.03) and forehead (P=0.05) scores. On regression analysis, controlling for sex, race, craniosynostosis type, and follow-up, there were no significant differences between operation types in any domain. Metopic and sagittal synostosis were associated with higher Eye (metopic: 17.61, P=0.049; sagittal: 41.44, P<0.001) and Head scores (metopic: 48.12, P=0.001; sagittal: 49.35, P<0.001), and sagittal synostosis was associated with higher Face (38.16, P<0.001), Forehead (55.93, P<0.001), and Nose scores (19.28, P=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>From patients' and parents' perspectives at a single institution, SC and CVR were equivalent regarding aesthetics and health-related quality of life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010857\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010857","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Analysis of Patient-reported Outcomes After Cranial Vault Remodeling and Strip Craniectomy With the FACE-Q Craniofacial Module.
Background: The debate continues among craniofacial surgeons regarding the effectiveness of strip craniectomy (SC) compared with cranial vault remodeling (CVR) in achieving optimal functional and aesthetic outcomes in patients with single-suture craniosynostosis. This study aimed to compare long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between SC and CVR procedures at a single institution using the validated FACE-Q Craniofacial module.
Methods: Patients older than or equal to 8 years of age and parents of patients younger than 8 years of age who underwent SC or CVR for single-suture craniosynostosis were eligible. Patients with <2 years of follow-up, lambdoid synostosis, and syndromes were excluded. Primary endpoints were PROs as measured by the FACE-Q, with higher scores indicating increased health-related quality of life. Linear regression was used to control for covariates.
Results: Sixty-two participants completed the module (response rate 33.3%). SC was performed in 29 patients (46.8%), and CVR in 33 patients (53.2%). On unadjusted bivariate analysis, SC patients had higher eye (P=0.03) and forehead (P=0.05) scores. On regression analysis, controlling for sex, race, craniosynostosis type, and follow-up, there were no significant differences between operation types in any domain. Metopic and sagittal synostosis were associated with higher Eye (metopic: 17.61, P=0.049; sagittal: 41.44, P<0.001) and Head scores (metopic: 48.12, P=0.001; sagittal: 49.35, P<0.001), and sagittal synostosis was associated with higher Face (38.16, P<0.001), Forehead (55.93, P<0.001), and Nose scores (19.28, P=0.003).
Conclusions: From patients' and parents' perspectives at a single institution, SC and CVR were equivalent regarding aesthetics and health-related quality of life.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery serves as a forum of communication for all those involved in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery and pediatric plastic surgery. Coverage ranges from practical aspects of craniofacial surgery to the basic science that underlies surgical practice. The journal publishes original articles, scientific reviews, editorials and invited commentary, abstracts and selected articles from international journals, and occasional international bibliographies in craniofacial surgery.