Mystery of the Muenke midface: spheno-occipital synchondrosis fusion and craniofacial skeletal patterns

Meagan Wu,Arastoo Vossough,Benjamin B Massenburg,Dominic J Romeo,Jinggang J Ng,Joseph A Napoli,Jordan W Swanson,Scott P Bartlett,Jesse A Taylor
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-024-06518-1
Abstract:Purpose: The spheno-occipital synchondrosis (SOS) is an important site of endochondral ossification in the cranial base that closes prematurely in Apert, Crouzon, and Pfeiffer syndromes, which contributes to varying degrees of midface hypoplasia. The facial dysmorphology of Muenke syndrome, in contrast, is less severe with low rates of midface hypoplasia. We thus evaluated the timing of SOS fusion and cephalometric landmarks in patients with Muenke syndrome compared to normal controls. Methods: Patients with Muenke syndrome who had at least one fine-cut head computed tomography scan performed from 2000 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. A case-control study was performed of patient scans and age- and sex-matched control scans. SOS fusion status was evaluated as open, partially closed, or closed. Results: We included 28 patients and compared 77 patient scans with 77 control scans. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated an insignificantly earlier timeline of SOS fusion in Muenke syndrome (p = 0.300). Mean sella-orbitale (SO) distance was shorter (44.0 ± 6.6 vs. 47.7 ± 6.7 mm, p < 0.001) and mean sella-nasion-Frankfort horizontal (SN-FH) angle was greater (12.1° ± 3.8° vs. 10.1° ± 3.2°, p < 0.001) in the Muenke group, whereas mean sella-nasion-A point (SNA) angle was similar and normal (81.1° ± 5.7° vs. 81.4° ± 4.7°, p = 0.762). Conclusion: Muenke syndrome is characterized by mild and often absent midfacial hypoplasia, with the exception of slight retropositioning of the infraorbital rim. Interestingly, SOS fusion patterns in these patients are not significantly different from age- and sex-matched controls despite an increased odds of fusion. It is possible that differences in timing of SOS fusion may manifest phenotypically at the infraorbital rim rather than at the maxilla.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?