Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 48, Issue 5, pp 701–707 | Cite as

Centile charts for cranial sutures in children younger than 1 year based on ultrasound measurements

  • Katya Rozovsky
  • Nicholas James Barrowman
  • Elka Miller
Original Article



Cranial US allows for the evaluation of premature closure (synostosis) or abnormal widening of the cranial sutures. An understanding of the normal anatomy is required to help define the presence or absence of abnormality.


To provide reference for normal ultrasound measurements of cranial sutures during the child’s first year.

Materials and methods

We included children ages 0 to 12 months who were referred to the hospital during 2011–2013 for radiographic evaluation of cranial sutures. Cranial US study was focused on evaluating the sagittal, coronal, lambdoid and metopic sutures. We measured the hypoechoic gap between the bones (patent suture). Two readers performed the measurements, blinded to clinical indications and previous reports. Estimates of the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles were achieved for ages 1–12 months.


Of 129 children whose families consented to cranial US, 11 were excluded because of craniosynostosis and 3 for suboptimal quality of cranial US images. In 115 patients measurements of normal cranial sutures were obtained (75 boys [65%], ages 0.26–11.27 months). For each suture, the suture size decreased significantly with age (P<0.001). Only the metopic suture was noted to close completely toward the end of the first year of age. There were no statistically significant differences in age-related suture size by gender.


The current patient series represents a reference of percentiles of normal ultrasound measurements of cranial sutures during the first year of age.


Centile charts Children Cranial sutures Infants Measurement Skull Ultrasound 



We thank Dr. Kristin Udjus and Dr. Nagwa Wilson for help recruiting patients and supervising the ultrasound studies. We are grateful to the families who consented to take part in the study, and to the sonographers of the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario who participated in caring for the infants. We thank Joanne Zabihaylo for administrative support.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Rozovsky K, Udjus K, Wilson N et al (2016) Cranial ultrasound as a first-line imaging examination for craniosynostosis. Pediatrics 137:e20152230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hall K, Besachio D, Moore M et al (2017) Effectiveness of screening for craniosynostosis with ultrasound: a retrospective review. Pediatr Radiol 47:606–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Proisy M, Riffaud L, Chouklati K et al (2017) Ultrasonography for the diagnosis of craniosynostosis. Eur J Radiol 90:250–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pogliani L, Zuccotti GV, Furlanetto M et al (2017) Cranial ultrasound is a reliable first step imaging in children with suspected craniosynostosis. Childs Nerv Syst.
  5. 5.
    Mitchell L, Kitley C, Armitage T et al (2011) Normal sagittal and coronal suture widths by using CT imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 32:1801–1805CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Soboleski D, McCloskey D, Mussari B et al (1997) Sonography of normal cranial sutures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:819–821CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ngo A, Sze R, Parisi M et al (2004) Cranial suture simulator for ultrasound diagnosis of craniosynostosis. Pediatr Radiol 34:535–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eilers P, Marx B (1996) Flexible smoothing with B-splines and penalties. Stat Sci 11:89–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rigby R, Stasinopoulos D (2005) Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape. J Appl Stat 54:507–554Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Landis J, Koch G (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Regelsberger J, Delling G, Helmke K et al (2006) Ultrasound in the diagnosis of craniosynostosis. J Craniofac Surg 17:623–625CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vu H, Panchal J, Parker E et al (2001) The timing of physiologic closure of the metopic suture: a review of 159 patients using reconstructed 3D CT scans of the craniofacial region. J Craniofac Surg 12:527–532CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weinzweig J, Kirschner R, Farley A et al (2003) Metopic synostosis: defining the temporal sequence of normal suture fusion and differentiating it from synostosis on the basis of computed tomography images. Plast Reconstr Surg 112:1211–1218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cohen M (1993) Sutural biology and the correlates of craniosynostosis. Am J Med Genet 47:581–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tubbs R, Bosmia A, Cohen-Gadol A (2012) The human calvaria: a review of embryology, anatomy, pathology, and molecular development. Childs Nerv Syst 28:23–31CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dalashaw J, Persing J, Jane J (1991) Cranial deformation in craniosynostosis. A new explanation. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2:611–620Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical Imaging, Children’s Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Department of Diagnostic Imaging, HSC, Child’s Health University of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  3. 3.Research Institute, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario University of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations