The Kaleidoscope of Midface Management in Apert Syndrome: A 23-Year Single-Institution Experience

This study assesses operative trends over time and outcomes of five osteotomy techniques used to treat the Apert midface. Using clinical and photogrammetric data, we present our institution's selection rationale for correcting specific dysmorphologies of the Apert midface based on the individual phenotype.We retrospectively reviewed patients with Apert syndrome who underwent midface distraction from 2000 to 2023. Patients were temporally divided by the year 2012 to assess differences in surgical approach. Postoperative facial dimension changes, surgical and perioperative characteristics, and complications data were compared across techniques.Thirty-nine patients with Apert syndrome underwent 41 midface distraction procedures: 23 (56%) in the early cohort and 18 (44%) in the late cohort. The use of segmental osteotomies for frontofacial advancement increased from 0% before 2012 to 61% from 2012 onwards (p<0.001). Monobloc with bipartition was the only technique that decreased intercanthal distance (p=0.016), and Le Fort II with zygomatic repositioning achieved the greatest median change in bilateral canthal tilt of 8.7° (IQR 1.3°, 8.7°; p=0.068). Monobloc with Le Fort II achieved the greatest median change in facial convexity of -34.9° (IQR -43.3°, -29.2°; p=0.031). Severity of complications, stratified by Clavien-Dindo grade, was greater in transcranial than subcranial procedures but similar between segmental and non-segmental osteotomies (p=0.365).In studying the Apert midface and attempting to resolve its varying functional and aesthetic issues, we document an evolution towards multi-piece osteotomies over time. With an appreciation for differential midface hypoplasia, segmentation is associated with more effective normalization of the Apert face.