A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Distraction Osteogenesis and Spring-Mediated Cranioplasty for Posterior
Trey D Watmore1, Austin Grove1, Andrew Ritchey2
1Phoenix Children's Center for Cleft and Craniofacial Care, Division of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Phoenix Children's, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare perioperative outcomes, complications, imaging utilization, and device management following posterior vault distraction osteogenesis (PVDO) and spring-mediated cranioplasty (SMC) for multisutural craniosynostosis.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingSingle pediatric tertiary care center.Patients, ParticipantsTwenty-three patients with multisutural craniosynostosis treated between 2017 and 2025 (PVDO, n = 18; SMC, n = 5).InterventionsPVDO or SMC.Main Outcome Measure(s)Time to device removal, imaging utilization, reoperations, readmissions, device-related complications, revision surgeries, wound infections, and absolute intracranial volume change.ResultsPVDO was associated with earlier device removal than SMC (78.7 ± 22.1 vs. 133.0 ± 27.4 days; P = .0015) but greater postoperative imaging utilization during the first year (5.33 ± 1.28 vs. 2.80 ± 1.64 studies; P = .01). Rates of reoperation (22.2% vs. 0%), readmission (22.2% vs. 40.0%), device-related complications (11.1% vs. 0%), revision surgery (16.7% vs. 0%), and wound infection (22.2% vs. 20.0%) did not differ significantly (all P ≥ .50). Preoperative imaging utilization and postoperative intracranial volume gain were comparable between groups.ConclusionsPVDO and SMC demonstrated similar safety profiles and intracranial volume expansion in patients with multisutural craniosynostosis. Compared with SMC, PVDO enabled earlier device removal but required increased postoperative imaging. These findings may inform operative planning, postoperative surveillance, and family counseling. Larger, multicenter studies with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes.
