A computational modelling tool for prediction of head reshaping following endoscopic strip craniectomy and helmet therapy for the treatment of scaphocephaly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic strip craniectomy followed by helmet therapy (ESCH) is a minimally invasive approach for correcting sagittal craniosynostosis. The treatment involves a patient-specific helmet designed to facilitate lateral growth while constraining sagittal expansion. In this study, finite element modelling was used to predict post-treatment head reshaping, improving our comprehension of the necessary helmet therapy duration. METHOD: Six patients (aged 11 weeks to 9 months) who underwent ESCH at Connecticut Children's Hospital were enrolled in this study. Day-1 post-operative 3D scans were used to create skin, skull, and intracranial volume models. Patient-specific helmet models, incorporating areas for growth, were designed based on post-operative imaging. Brain growth was simulated through thermal expansion, and treatments were modelled according to post-operative Imaging available. Mechanical testing and finite element modelling were combined to determine patient-specific mechanical properties from bone samples collected from surgery. Validation compared simulated end-of-treatment skin surfaces with optical scans in terms of shape matching and cranial index estimation. RESULTS: Comparison between the simulated post-treatment head shape and optical scans showed that on average 97.3 ± 2.1 % of surface data points were within a distance range of -3 to 3 mm. The cranial index was also accurately predicted (r = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, finite element models effectively predicted the ESCH cranial remodeling outcomes up to 8 months postoperatively. This computational tool offers valuable insights to guide and refine helmet treatment duration. This study also incorporated patient-specific material properties, enhancing the accuracy of the modeling approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".