{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02696793002915452, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00510204081632653, 'mean_word_length': 5.240909090909091, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[An infantile skull fracture followed by the enlarging of the fracture line ("enlarging skull fracture") (author's transl)].

We experience sometimes an infantile skull fracture which is followed by the skull fracture line and bulging of the fractured area day by day after the head injury. Since John Howship reported the case of the partial absorption of the right parietal bone, arising from a blow on the head in a child aged 9 month in 1816, this phenomenon was variously described meningocele spuria, traumatic cephalohydrocele, leptomeningeal cyst, fibrosing osteitis, cerebrocranial erosion, traumatic meningocele, die wachsende Schädelfrakture, growing skull fracture, etc. So called "growing skull fracture" has generally the triad of the symptoms which are the parietal skull fracture in infancy or childhood, traumatic dural tears, and subsequent enlargement of the fractures. And it is said that the dural tear is an indispensable condition for the developing of the "growing skull fracture". But we recently had the case of a 14 day old male infant who had neither traumatic dural tear nor subdural hematoma, but the progressive enlarging of the fracture line in the left parietal bone. The authors suggest that there should be the difference between the growing skull fracture (with the dural teat) and the enlarging skull fracture (without the dural tear).