Operative Management of Nonsyndromic Sagittal Synostosis: A Head-to-Head Meta-analysis of Outcomes Comparing 3 Techniques.

Background: The timing and surgical technique for the treatment of sagittal synostosis remain controversial. Calvarial vault remodeling (CVR), strip craniectomy (SC), and spring-mediated cranioplasty (SMC) are currently in use. We perform a meta-analysis of the literature to compare these 3 techniques.

Methods: A literature search identified articles involving operative management of nonsyndromic sagittal synostosis. Comparison of 2 operative techniques was required, and methodology was assessed via the American Society of Plastic Surgeons' Levels of Evidence. Three techniques were considered: CVR, SC, and SMC. Meta-analysis was conducted for change in cephalic index (CI), reported as weighted mean difference (WMD). Pooled subgroup comparisons were performed for operative time, length of stay, blood loss, and cost.

Results: Twelve studies providing level 2 or 3 evidence were included. All studies involved CVR (n = 187), 8 involved SC (n = 299), and 7 involved SMC (n = 158). Head-to-head comparison of change in CI demonstrated a greater, yet statistically insignificant change for CVR versus SMC, WMD = 0.94 (-0.23 to 2.11) (P = 0.12, I(2) = 55%). Calvarial vault remodeling showed a statistically greater change in CI versus SC, WMD = 1.47 (0.47-2.48) (P = 0.004, I(2) = 66%). Compared with SMC/SC, CVR had longer operative length (170 vs 97 minutes), higher blood loss (238 vs 47 mL), longer length of stay (5.1 vs 2.9 days), and higher costs ($35,280 vs $13,147), all with P < 0.0001.

Conclusions: This study, the first meta-analysis comparing 3 primary operations for correcting nonsyndromic sagittal synostosis, demonstrates no difference in CI for CVR versus SMC and a small but statistically greater improvement in CI favoring CVR over SC. Secondary outcomes favored SC/SMC procedures over CVR. However, long-term studies are still needed to adequately assess the risk-benefit ratios.