Search

Background: Currently, the pathogenesis of leptomeningeal cysts, also known as growing skull fractures, is still debated. The purpose of this study was to examine the specific skull fracture characteristics that are associated with the development of growing skull fractures and describe the authors' institutional experience managing this rare entity., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed that included all patients younger than 5 years presenting to a single institution with skull fractures from 2003 to 2017. Patient demographics, cause of injury, skull fracture characteristics (e.g., amount of diastasis, linear versus comminuted fracture), concomitant neurologic injuries, and management outcomes were recorded. Potential factors contributing to the development of a growing skull fracture and neurologic injuries associated with growing skull fractures were evaluated using univariate logistic regression., Results: A total of 905 patients met the authors' inclusion criteria. Of these, six (0.66 percent) were diagnosed with a growing skull fracture. Growing skull fractures were more likely to be comminuted (83.3 percent versus 40.7 percent; p = 0.082) and to present with diastasis on imaging (100 percent versus 26.1 percent; p < 0.001; mean amount of diastasis, 7.1 mm versus 3.1 mm; p < 0.001). Univariate logistic regression analysis confirmed the role of a comminuted fracture pattern (OR, 7.572) and the degree of diastasis (OR, 2.081 per mm diastasis) as significant risk factors for the development of growing skull fractures., Conclusions: The authors' analysis revealed that fracture comminution and diastasis width are associated with the development of growing skull fractures. The authors recommend dural integrity assessment, close follow-up, and early management in young children who present with these skull fracture characteristics., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Risk, III.

Background: Nasoorbitoethmoid fractures commonly accompany midface fractures and may be underdiagnosed, resulting in incomplete reconstruction or inadequate treatment following facial trauma. To better understand the nasoorbitoethmoid fracture diagnosis and treatment tendencies, the authors analyzed concomitant nasoorbitoethmoid injuries in the setting of zygoma fractures., Methods: The facial trauma database at a level I trauma center was evaluated. All patients with diagnosed zygoma fractures from June of 2011 to March of 2016 were assessed for a concomitant nasoorbitoethmoid injury. Documentation of these fractures in radiology, plastic surgery, and operative notes was recorded, as was the rate of nasoorbitoethmoid fracture surgical repair., Results: The authors identified 339 eligible patients and completed retrospective analysis of computed tomographic images for their 356 zygoma fractures. The incidence of concomitant nasoorbitoethmoid fractures was 30.6 percent (109 of 356). Documentation rates of nasoorbitoethmoid fractures were 0 percent, 3.7 percent, and 8.3 percent in radiology, plastic surgery, and operative notes, respectively. The rate of surgical correction of nasoorbitoethmoid injuries was 22.9 percent (25 of 109). Of those fractures identified, 44.9 percent (49 of 109) were minimally displaced or nondisplaced. Subset analysis of only significantly displaced fractures yielded an incidence of 16.8 percent (60 of 356). Of significantly displaced fractures, documentation rates were 0 percent, 6.7 percent, and 16.8 percent in radiology, plastic surgery, and operative notes, respectively. The surgical repair rate of significantly displaced fractures was 31.7 percent (19 of 60)., Conclusions: These findings suggest a high concomitance rate of nasoorbitoethmoid fractures with zygoma fractures and identify a tendency to underdocument and undertreat this injury pattern. Clinicians managing patients with midface trauma should have a high suspicion for nasoorbitoethmoid trauma. Plastic surgeons and radiologists should be better trained in identifying the nasoorbitoethmoid fracture pattern.

Learning Objectives: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Diagnose zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures from physical examination and radiographic findings. 2. Plan the necessary surgical approaches for operative treatment of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures depending on severity. 3. Understand the three-dimensional anatomy of the orbit and zygomaticomaxillary complex and the importance of the zygomaticosphenoid suture along the lateral orbital sidewall. 4. Be aware of pitfalls and associated fractures that can complicate anatomical reduction of zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures., Summary: Fractures of the zygoma are some of the most commonly treated facial fractures, yet reconstruction of the three-dimensional structure of the zygomaticomaxillary complex can be challenging, and malunions are common. This article presents an evidence-based, systemic approach to the assessment and treatment of zygoma fractures from the simple to the complex. Anatomy, approaches, techniques, and pitfalls are described in an effort to improve the treatment of these common facial fractures.

Learning Objectives: After reading this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Demonstrate an understanding of some of the changes in aspects of facial fracture management. 2. Assess a patient presenting with facial fractures. 3. Understand indications and timing of surgery. 4. Recognize exposures of the craniomaxillofacial skeleton. 5. Identify methods for repair of typical facial fracture patterns. 6. Discuss the common complications seen with facial fractures., Summary: Restoration of the facial skeleton and associated soft tissues after trauma involves accurate clinical and radiologic assessment to effectively plan a management approach for these injuries. When surgical intervention is necessary, timing, exposure, sequencing, and execution of repair are all integral to achieving the best long-term outcomes for these patients.

Fractures of the facial skeleton can result in the loss of an aesthetically pleasing appearance and basic function, and many cases subsequently require an operative intervention. The surgeon managing these facial fractures must, at the same time, be cognizant of concomitant injuries, including neurologic, ophthalmologic, and cervical spine issues. For most situations, early stabilization in anatomical position using rigid fixation will give the most accurate reduction for the optimal return of preoperative appearance and function, while reducing long-term soft-tissue contracture.

Background: Several studies have reported the relationship among craniomaxillofacial fractures, cervical spine injuries, and head injuries with varying results. Life-threatening injuries to the head and cervical spine with devastating consequences cannot be missed by reconstructive surgeons during evaluation of facial trauma. The purpose of this study was to establish the prevalence of cervical spine injuries and/or head injuries with isolated and multiple craniomaxillofacial fractures at trauma centers across the United States., Methods: The study was a retrospective chart review of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnosis and procedure codes from the National Trauma Data Bank between the years 2002 and 2006. This included data on over 1.3 million trauma patients from the United States and Puerto Rico., Results: In the setting of an isolated mandible, nasal, orbital floor, malar/maxilla, or frontal/parietal bone fracture, cervical spine injury ranged from 4.9 to 8.0 percent, head injury ranged from 28.7 to 79.9 percent, and concomitant cervical spine and head injury was present in 2.8 to 5.8 percent. In the setting of two or more facial fractures, the prevalence of cervical spine injury ranged from 7.0 to 10.8 percent. The prevalence of head injury ranged from 65.5 to 88.7 percent, and the prevalence of concomitant cervical spine and head injury ranged from 5.8 to 10.1 percent., Conclusion: This article represents the most accurate description of the prevalence of cervical spine and/or head injury with craniomaxillofacial fracture at trauma centers in the United States.

Background: Superior orbital fissure syndrome is a rare complication that occurs in association with craniofacial trauma. The characteristics of superior orbital fissure syndrome are attributable to a constellation of cranial nerve III, IV, and VI palsies. This is the largest series describing traumatic superior orbital fissure syndrome that assesses the recovery of individual cranial nerve function after treatment., Methods: In a review from 1988 to 2002, 33 patients with superior orbital fissure syndrome were identified from 11,284 patients (0.3 percent) with skull and facial fractures. Severity of cranial nerve injury and functional recovery were evaluated by extraocular muscle movement. Patients were evaluated on average 6 days after initial injury, and average follow-up was 11.8 months., Results: There were 23 male patients. The average age was 31 years. The major mechanism of injury was motorcycle accident (67 percent). Twenty-two received conservative treatment, five were treated with steroids, and six patients underwent surgical decompression of the superior orbital fissure. After initial injury, cranial nerve VI suffered the most damage, whereas cranial nerve IV sustained the least. In the first 3 months, recovery was greatest in cranial nerve VI. At 9 months, function was lowest in cranial nerve VI and highest in cranial nerve IV. Eight patients (24 percent) had complete recovery of all cranial nerves. Functional recovery of all cranial nerves reached a plateau at 6 months after trauma., Conclusions: Cranial nerve IV suffered the least injury, whereas cranial nerve VI experienced the most neurologic deficits. Cranial nerve palsies improved to their final recovery endpoints by 6 months. Surgical decompression is considered when there is evidence of bony compression of the superior orbital fissure.

Summary: Among patients who present for an orthognathic evaluation, a common finding is the presence of a laterally deviated mandible. At times, there is a cause to which the lower face asymmetry can be attributed, such as personal history of trauma to the face, presence of congenital disease known to affect the mandible, or other developmental abnormalities. More commonly, however, the patient is underdiagnosed and the cause of the idiopathic, laterally deviated mandible may be perplexing. The authors review the common causes of lateral deviation of the mandible and discuss how the growth of the mandible is affected and how the correct diagnosis may be ascertained. Among the common diagnoses, there are two major categories of mandibular asymmetry: (1) altered cranial base (e.g., muscular torticollis, unilateral craniosynostosis, and deformational plagiocephaly) and (2) condylar abnormality (e.g., condylar fractures, condylar hyperplasia, juvenile condylar arthritis, and hemifacial microsomia). Proper diagnosis and subsequent treatment of the underlying abnormality of the deviated mandible ensure the patient of the appropriate orthognathic reconstruction and decrease the likelihood of skeletal relapse after surgery.

Learning Objectives: After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the radiographic and clinical diagnosis of frontal sinus fractures. 2. Identify various management approaches to the frontal sinus fracture and the indications for each. 3. Understand the rationale behind the decision of sinus obliteration when needed. 4. Recognize the most common complications arising from frontal sinus fracture treatment and the methods of avoiding or managing these complications., Summary: Frontal sinus fracture management is still controversial and involves preserving function when feasible or obliterating the sinus and duct, depending on the fracture pattern. There is no single algorithm for the choice of management, but appropriate treatment depends on an accurate diagnosis using physical examination, computed tomography data, and the findings of intraoperative exploration. The amount and location of fixation and the need for frontonasal duct and sinus obliteration or elimination of the entire sinus depend on the anatomy of the fracture in general and the extent of involvement of the anterior wall of the sinus, the frontonasal duct, and the posterior wall in particular. This article discusses an algorithm for frontal sinus fractures that was obtained from the literature and modified according to the authors' experience. The decision-making process presented by the authors has withstood the test of time over a period of more than 20 years in their practice and has been proven to be safe and efficacious in treating frontal sinus fractures of all types.

A new technique is presented for examining patients suspected of having fractures in the naso-orbitoethmoidal region. It consists of a bimanual examination with a Kelly clamp intranasally and the opposite index finger externally. It has proven reliable in over 500 patient screenings to date. This technique is recommended as an addition to, and not a replacement for, the standard physical examination and radiologic evaluation of the maxillofacial trauma patient.

Accurate assessment of ocular motility is an essential aspect of the evaluation of patients with apparent ptosis and patients with orbital fractures. A four-step test is described as the basis for evaluation, and several syndromes of ocular motility dysfunction are discussed.

Ultrasound and CT scans have been used to examine 12 patients with suspected medial orbital wall fractures. A good correlation between ultrasound and CT scanning was demonstrated, and the authors believe that either investigation is a suitable alternative to conventional radiology when this type of injury is suspected.