Facial Asymmetry in Children with Unicoronal Synostosis who have Undergone Craniofacial Reconstruction in Infancy. (July 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Öwall, Louise; Darvann, Tron A.; Larsen, Per; Hove, Hanne D.; Hermann, Nuno V.; Bøgeskov, Lars; Kreiborg, Sven
• Is Part Of: Cleft palate-craniofacial journal. Volume 53:Number 4(2016)
• Page Start: 385
• Page End: 393
• Publication Date: 2016-07
• Subjects: 3D photos -- facial asymmetry -- unicoronal synostosis; Cleft palate -- Periodicals; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Cranial manipulation -- Periodicals; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Face -- Abnormalities -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Fente palatine -- Périodiques; Crâne -- Malformations -- Périodiques; Manipulation crânienne -- Périodiques; Crâne -- Malformations -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Face -- Malformations -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Cleft palate; Cranial manipulation; Face -- Abnormalities -- Surgery; Skull -- Abnormalities; Skull -- Abnormalities -- Surgery; Cleft Lip; Cleft Palate; Facial Bones -- abnormalities; Skull -- abnormalities; Periodicals; Periodicals; Periodicals; 617.522
• DOI: 10.1597/15-089
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1055-6656

Abstract

Objective: Quantitatively assess 3D spatially detailed soft-tissue facial asymmetry in children who had undergone craniofacial reconstruction for Unicoronal Synostosis (UCS), and compare the facial asymmetry to control patients. It was hypothesized that there would be no significant differences in the facial asymmetry between the groups. Design: Clinical, retrospective follow-up study. Methodological study. Setting: Primary care center. Patients/Participants: Twenty-two children with UCS were selected after review of records. Inclusion criteria: isolated UCS; surgically treated for UCS within the first 19 months of life, without secondary reconstruction; and DNA analysis for the Muenke mutation. An age- and sex-matched control group was employed. Interventions: The UCS group had undergone bilateral craniotomy of the frontal bone with unilateral supraorbital rim advancement. Main outcome Measure(s): Using 3D surface scanning, a detailed map of 3D asymmetry presenting the amount of asymmetry in the sagittal, vertical, and transverse directions was calculated for six facial subregions. Results: The facial asymmetry in the UCS group was significantly larger than in the control group for all regions, to the largest extent in the sagittal direction (level of significance: 5%). The regions with the most pronounced asymmetry were cheeks (mean: 5.45 mm; SD: 1.83 mm), forehead (mean: 5.00 mm; SD: 1.57 mm), and eyes (mean: 4.26 mm; SD: 1.44 mm). Conclusions: Ninety percent of the UCS patients in the study had significant facial asymmetry throughout the facial area. The study demonstrates a methodology of facial asymmetry quantification well suited for soft-tissue surgical outcome evaluations and long-term follow-up studies in patients with craniofacial anomalies.