Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 20, 2025
Lateral Molar Approach-Driven Transoral Endoscopic Procedure for Benign Infratemporal Fossa Tumor Resection
Published on: August 15, 2025
Outcomes of Intracranial Versus Subcranial Approaches to the Frontofacial Skeleton
Naikhoba C O Munabi1, Madeleine Williams2, Eric S Nagengast1
1Resident, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
Purpose:
An intracranial approach to the craniomaxillofacial skeleton can be effective for correcting complex craniofacial dystoses such as frontofacial hypoplasia, hypertelorism, and orbital dystopia. However, the significant morbidity resulting from the high complication rates has limited intracranial use. Given the need for intracranial approaches for certain clinical indications, the present study reevaluated intracranial frontofacial procedures to determine their safety and outcomes.
Patients And Methods:
A retrospective review was performed of all frontofacial procedures completed between 2007 and 2017 at a single institution. Patients who had undergone monobloc distraction alone or with facial bipartition, facial bipartition alone, or box osteotomy were included in the intracranial cohort. Those who had undergone Le Fort III distraction, advancement, or a combination with Le Fort I were included in the subcranial cohort. The recorded data included demographics, previous craniofacial surgery, and operative events. The complications rates were compared between the 2 cohorts.
Results:
The present study included 65 patients-35 subcranial and 30 intracranial. The rates of previous craniomaxillofacial (P = .193) and intracranial (P = .340) surgery were equivalent between the 2 cohorts. Of the 30 intracranial and 35 subcranial patients, 26.7% and 34.3% experienced complications (P = .218). The intracranial patients experienced more dural tears (53.3 vs 5.7%; P < .0001); however, no significant differences were observed in cerebrospinal fluid leakage. Reintubations (n = 3; 4.5%) occurred exclusively in the subcranial group. No significant differences in the major and minor complication rates were observed between the 2 cohorts.
Conclusions:
Intracranial and subcranial frontofacial procedures are associated with an equal risk of major and minor complications. Given the lack of an increase in risk, intracranial frontofacial procedures should be considered for the management of complex craniofacial dystoses.
Related Concept Videos
01:14Cranial Bones: Superior and Posterior View
The frontal bone is the single bone that forms the forehead. At its anterior midline, between the eyebrows, there is a slight depression called the glabella. The frontal bone also forms the supraorbital margin of the orbit. Near the middle of this margin is the supraorbital foramen, the opening that provides passage for a sensory nerve to the forehead. The frontal bone is thickened just above each supraorbital margin,...
01:08Overview of the Skull
The cranial vault surrounds and protects the brain and houses the middle and inner ear structures. This cavity is bounded superiorly by the rounded top of the skull, which...
01:22Sutures of the Skull
Sutures are immobile joints between adjacent bones of the skull. The narrow gap between the bones is filled with dense, fibrous connective tissue that unites the bones. The long sutures located between the skull bones are not straight but instead follow irregular, tightly twisting paths. These twisting lines tightly...
01:27Cranial Bones: Lateral View
The temporal bone forms the lower lateral side of the skull. The temporal bone is subdivided into several regions. The flattened upper portion is the squamous portion of the temporal bone. Below this area and projecting anteriorly is the zygomatic process of the temporal bone, which forms the posterior portion of the zygomatic arch. Posteriorly is the mastoid portion of the temporal bone. Projecting...