Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Koen F. M. Joosten x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Caroline Driessen, Natalja Bannink, Maarten Lequin, Marie-Lise C. van Veelen, Nicole C. Naus, Koen F. M. Joosten and Irene M. J. Mathijssen


Children with syndromic or complex craniosynostosis are evaluated for increased intracranial pressure (ICP) using funduscopy to detect papilledema. However, papilledema is a late sign of increased ICP. Because papilledema might be preceded by an increase in optic nerve sheath (ONS) diameter, the authors conducted a prospective study to establish the validity and applicability of measuring the ONS using ultrasonography.


From January 2007 to December 2009, 175 bilateral ultrasonography ONS measurements were performed in 128 patients with syndromic or complex craniosynostosis during the daytime. The measurements were correlated with ONS diameter assessed on CT and simultaneous funduscopy, when available. Furthermore, results were compared by using thresholds for ONS diameters on ultrasonography that are available in the literature.


The mean ONS diameter on ultrasonography was 3.1 ± 0.5 mm. The CT measurement was significantly correlated with the ultrasonography measurement (r = 0.41, p < 0.001). The mean ONS diameter in 38 eyes with papilledema was 3.3 ± 0.5 mm, compared with 3.1 ± 0.5 mm in the eyes of patients without papilledema (p = 0.039). Relative to the age-related thresholds, the ONS diameter was too large in 11 eyes (3%), particularly in patients with Crouzon syndrome. Compared with funduscopy, ultrasonography sensitivity was 11%, specificity was 97%, and positive and negative predictive values were 40% and 86%, respectively.


Ultrasonography is a valid and easy way of quantifying the ONS. Although the ONS diameter is larger in children with papilledema, it cannot be used as a daytime screening tool instead of funduscopy. The ONS diameter is possibly a more real-time indicator of ICP.

Full access

Irene Mathijssen, Robbin de Goederen, Sarah L. Versnel, Koen F. M. Joosten, Marie-Lise C. van Veelen and Robert C. Tasker

Restricted access

Bianca K. den Ottelander, Robbin de Goederen, Marie-Lise C. van Veelen, Stephanie D. C. van de Beeten, Maarten H. Lequin, Marjolein H. G. Dremmen, Sjoukje E. Loudon, Marieke A. J. Telleman, Henriëtte H. W. de Gier, Eppo B. Wolvius, Stephen T. H. Tjoa, Sarah L. Versnel, Koen F. M. Joosten and Irene M. J. Mathijssen


The authors evaluated the long-term outcome of their treatment protocol for Muenke syndrome, which includes a single craniofacial procedure.


This was a prospective observational cohort study of Muenke syndrome patients who underwent surgery for craniosynostosis within the first year of life. Symptoms and determinants of intracranial hypertension were evaluated by longitudinal monitoring of the presence of papilledema (fundoscopy), obstructive sleep apnea (OSA; with polysomnography), cerebellar tonsillar herniation (MRI studies), ventricular size (MRI and CT studies), and skull growth (occipital frontal head circumference [OFC]). Other evaluated factors included hearing, speech, and ophthalmological outcomes.


The study included 38 patients; 36 patients underwent fronto-supraorbital advancement. The median age at last follow-up was 13.2 years (range 1.3–24.4 years). Three patients had papilledema, which was related to ophthalmological disorders in 2 patients. Three patients had mild OSA. Three patients had a Chiari I malformation, and tonsillar descent < 5 mm was present in 6 patients. Tonsillar position was unrelated to papilledema, ventricular size, or restricted skull growth. Ten patients had ventriculomegaly, and the OFC growth curve deflected in 3 patients. Twenty-two patients had hearing loss. Refraction anomalies were diagnosed in 14/15 patients measured at ≥ 8 years of age.


Patients with Muenke syndrome treated with a single fronto-supraorbital advancement in their first year of life rarely develop signs of intracranial hypertension, in accordance with the very low prevalence of its causative factors (OSA, hydrocephalus, and restricted skull growth). This illustrates that there is no need for a routine second craniofacial procedure. Patient follow-up should focus on visual assessment and speech and hearing outcomes.