The current literature on unilateral coronal craniosynostosis is replete with repair techniques and surgical outcomes; however, information regarding neurodevelopment remains unclear. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to comprehensively assess the neurodevelopmental outcomes of patients with unicoronal craniosynostosis compared with their healthy peers or normative data.
A systematic review of the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from database inception to January 19, 2022, was performed. Included studies assessed neurodevelopment of patients with unicoronal craniosynostosis. Two independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data based on a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results of developmental tests were compared with normative data or controls to generate Hedges\' g statistics for meta-analysis. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the National Institutes of Health Assessment Tool.
A total of 19 studies were included and analyzed, with an overall fair reporting quality. A meta-analysis of 325 postoperative patients demonstrated that scores of general neurodevelopment were below average but within one standard deviation of the norm (Hedges\' g = -0.68 [95% CI -0.90 to -0.45], p < 0.001). Similarly, postoperative patients exhibited lower scores in verbal, psychomotor, and mathematic outcome assessments.
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that patients with unicoronal craniosynostosis had poorer neurodevelopment, although scores generally remained within the normal range. These data may guide implementation of regular neurocognitive assessments and early learning support of patients with unicoronal craniosynostosis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic strip craniectomy with helmeting (ESCH) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious alternative to fronto-orbital remodeling (FOR) for selected children with craniosynostosis. In addition to clinical factors, there may be economic benefits from the use of ESCH instead of FOR.
METHODS: A retrospective review of 23 patients with nonsyndromic unicoronal craniosynostosis (UCS) treated with FOR was carried out at Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) for Children in London, UK. Secondary data were used for the ESCH cohort from a paper published by Jimenez and Barone (2013). Data were collected on surgical time, transfusion rates, length of hospital stay, adverse event rates, reintervention rates, and overall costs. Costs were categorized and then assigned to the appropriate data sets.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients undergoing FOR (vs. ESCH) was 17.4 mo (vs. 3.1 mo) with a mean surgical time of 234 min (vs. 55 min), mean transfusion volume of 221.6 mL (vs. 80.0 mL), mean transfusion rate of 14/23 (vs. 2/115), and a total immediate overnight stay of 3.13 days (vs. 97% next-day discharge). The FOR group had a higher adverse event rate (5/23 vs. 4/115, p=<0.005) and a higher number requiring extraocular muscle surgery (4/23 vs. 7/109, p=0.16). There was a substantial difference in overall costs between the two groups. Total variance cost for the FOR group was £7436.5 vs. £4951.35, representing a cost difference of £2485.15 over the 24-month study period.
CONCLUSIONS: ESCH, in comparison to FOR, appears as a more economical method in the management of USC patients, as well as having clinical benefits including reduced adverse event rate and improved ophthalmic outcomes.