Comparison of Outcomes between Infants above and below 5 Months of Age Undergoing Endoscopic Craniectomy for Sagittal Suture Synostosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic strip craniectomy followed by molding helmet therapy for sagittal suture synostosis is thought to be most effective in infants 3-4 months of age. However, infants often present to a neurosurgeon beyond this time period. The aim of this study was to compare morphological outcomes in older infants (5-7 months of age) with younger infants, in a series of babies who were operated endoscopically for sagittal suture synostosis. METHODS: The prospectively maintained Pediatric Neurosurgery Clinical Database at BC Children's Hospital was interrogated and 81 pediatric patients who had undergone an endoscopic craniectomy between 2010 and 2021 for sagittal craniosynostosis and had follow-up of at least 1 year were identified. Eleven of these patients received surgical intervention when they were 5 months of age or older (median 5.4 months, range 5.0-6.4). Morphological indices, duration of helmet therapy, and reoperation rates were compared between the early and late intervention groups. RESULTS: Both the early intervention (surgery before 5 months of age, n = 70) and the late intervention (surgery at 5 months or later, n = 11) groups had comparable average preoperative cephalic index (CI) (early - 67.1 vs. late - 69.4), change in CI (early - 6.7 vs. late - 4.7), and 2-year follow-up CI (early - 73.8 vs. late - 74.1). Both groups had similar average helmeting duration (6.6 vs. 6.1 months). Of the 11 late intervention patients, none required reoperation but poor cosmetic outcome was noted in 1 patient. The early intervention group had 1 patient who required a secondary cranial vault reconstruction due to persistent scaphocephaly. CONCLUSION: Infants who received an endoscopic craniectomy for sagittal suture synostosis after 5 months of age showed no statistically significant difference in morphological outcomes compared to the early intervention group.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".