Search

Background: Surgical management of neuromas is difficult, with no consensus on the most effective surgical procedure to improve pain and quality of life. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of neuromas by neurectomy, crush, and proximal transposition on improvement in pain, depression, and quality of life., Methods: Patients who underwent neuroma excision and proximal transposition were evaluated. Preoperative and postoperative visual analogue scale scores for pain (worst and average), depression, and quality of life were assessed using linear regression, and means were compared using paired t tests. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score was calculated preoperatively and postoperatively for upper extremity neuroma patients. Patients with long-term follow-up were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance comparing preoperative, postoperative, and long-term visual analogue scale scores., Results: Seventy patients (37 with upper extremity neuromas and 33 with lower extremity neuromas) met inclusion criteria. Statistically significant improvements in visual analogue scale scores were demonstrated for all four patient-rated qualities (p < 0.01) independent of duration of initial clinical follow-up. The change in preoperative to postoperative visual analogue scale scores was related inversely to the severity of preoperative scores for pain and depression. Neuroma excision and proximal transposition were equally effective in treating lower and upper extremity neuromas. Upper extremity neuroma patients had a statistically significant improvement in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire scores after surgical treatment (p < 0.02)., Conclusions: Surgical neurectomy, crush, and proximal nerve transposition significantly improved self-reported pain, depression, and quality-of-life scores. Surgical intervention is a viable treatment of neuroma pain and should be considered in patients with symptomatic neuromas refractory to nonoperative management., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, IV.

Background: Surgical correction of cranial abnormalities, including craniosynostosis, requires knowledge of normal skull shape to appreciate dysmorphic variations. However, the inability of current anthropometric techniques to adequately characterize three-dimensional cranial shape severely limits morphologic study. The authors previously introduced three-dimensional vector analysis, a quantitative method that maps cranial form from computed tomography data. In this article, the authors report its role in the development and validation of a normative database of pediatric cranial morphology and in clinical analysis of craniosynostosis., Methods: Normal pediatric craniofacial computed tomography data sets were acquired retrospectively from the Duke University Picture Archive and Communications System. Age increments ranging from 1 to 72 months were predetermined for scan acquisition. Three-dimensional vector analysis was performed on individual data sets, generating a set of point clouds. Averages and standard deviations for the age and gender bins of point clouds were used to create normative three-dimensional models. Anthropometric measurements from three-dimensional vector analysis models were compared with published matched data. Preoperative and postoperative morphologies of a sagittal synostosis case were analyzed using three-dimensional vector analysis and the normative database., Results: Three- and two-dimensional representations were created to define age-incremental normative models. Length and width dimensions agreed with previously published data. Detailed morphologic analysis is provided for a case of sagittal synostosis by applying age- and gender-matched data., Conclusions: Three-dimensional vector analysis provides accurate, comprehensive description of cranial morphology with quantitative graphic output. The method enables development of an extensive pediatric normative craniofacial database. Future application of these data will facilitate analysis of cranial anomalies and assist with clinical assessment.

The safety of medical radiation, particularly computed tomography, has recently received much attention in both the medical literature and the popular press. As knowledge regarding side effects of radiation exposure has increased, so have attempts to limit doses to patients through more selective use of scans and transitions to lower-dose protocols to conform to the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle. This trend has been apparent across many fields within medicine, including craniofacial surgery. Craniofacial surgeons should be familiar with these issues to participate in the determination of practice standards and to address patient concerns. A number of authors have questioned the value and necessity of obtaining computed tomography scans for the management of single-suture craniosynostosis in light of known radiation risks. Although unnecessary exposure to radiation from computed tomography scans should be avoided, imaging provides useful--often vital--information to the treatment of craniosynostosis. Use of low-dose protocols, which have been shown to provide images of satisfactory quality for the evaluation of both suture patency and associated intracranial abnormalities, may be a favorable alternative. The authors discuss the issue of medical radiation and its risks. In the context of risks and benefits, the authors reviewed the current practice of imaging in craniofacial surgery with the intent to encourage dialogue between surgeons and radiologists to develop thoughtful practice standards.