Literature DB >> 11857940

[Cranioplasty using the patient's autogenous bone preserved by freezing--an examination of post-operative infection rates].

Kazuki Nagayama1, Gakushi Yoshikawa, Ken Somekawa, Michihiro Kohno, Hiromu Segawa, Keiji Sano, Yoshiaki Shiokawa, Isamu Saito.   

Abstract

The current technique for cranioplasty using artificial bone requires further improvement with regard to infection, strength and comfort through good fitting. We have carried out cranioplasty using the patient's autogenous bone flap obtained during first surgery. It was immersed in 200 mg of Amikacin Sulphate, and frozen at -16 degrees C until its use in cranioplasty. From 1980 to 1998, cranioplasty has been carried out on 206 patients. They consisted of 118 males and 88 females, and their age ranged in our institute from 1 to 81; average age 51.1. Ruptured aneurysm (48%), head injury (14%), intracranial hemorrhage (23%) and cerebral infarction (12%) were the major causes requiring decompression surgery. We analyse the bone preservation period and the time between cranioplasty and the onset of infection. The infection rates per bone preservation periods, the causes of decompression and age groups are studied. Of the 208 case studies, infection necessitating bone removal or debridement was noted in 8 cases (3.88%). Average bone preservation period in the infected group was 31.1 days as compared with 54.9 days for the non-infected group (p < 0.05). Not patient age but the type of head injury is also a significant factor in post cranioplasty infection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11857940

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  No Shinkei Geka        ISSN: 0301-2603


  7 in total

1.  Delayed Cranioplasty: Outcomes Using Frozen Autologous Bone Flaps.

Authors:  Daniel Hng; Ivan Bhaskar; Mumtaz Khan; Charley Budgeon; Omprakash Damodaran; Neville Knuckey; Gabriel Lee
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2014-12-17

Review 2.  Predictors of infections following cranioplasty: a retrospective review of a large single center study.

Authors:  Mario Zanaty; Nohra Chalouhi; Robert M Starke; Rohan Chitale; Shannon Hann; Cory D Bovenzi; Mark P Saigh; Eric W Schwartz; Emily S I Kunkel; Alexandra S Efthimiadis-Budike; Pascal Jabbour; Richard Dalyai; Robert H Rosenwasser; Stavropoula I Tjoumakaris
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-10-22

3.  Analysis of the Risk Factors Affecting the Surgical Site Infection after Cranioplasty Following Decompressive Craniectomy.

Authors:  Jin Seong Kim; In Sung Park; Sung Kwon Kim; Hyun Park; Dong-Ho Kang; Chul-Hee Lee; Soo-Hyun Hwang; Jin-Myung Jung; Jong-Woo Han
Journal:  Korean J Neurotrauma       Date:  2015-10-31

4.  Comparison of Postoperative Complications between Simultaneous and Staged Surgery in Cranioplasty and Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Placement after Decompressive Craniectomy.

Authors:  Jong Han Gill; Hyun Ho Choi; Shin Heon Lee; Kyoung Min Jang; Taek Kyun Nam; Yong Sook Park; Jeong Taik Kwon
Journal:  Korean J Neurotrauma       Date:  2021-08-25

5.  Long-term incidence and predicting factors of cranioplasty infection after decompressive craniectomy.

Authors:  Sang-Hyuk Im; Dong-Kyu Jang; Young-Min Han; Jong-Tae Kim; Dong Sup Chung; Young Sup Park
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2012-10-22

6.  Cranioplasty with autologous cryopreserved bone after decompressive craniectomy: complications and risk factors for developing surgical site infection.

Authors:  J Sundseth; A Sundseth; J Berg-Johnsen; W Sorteberg; K-F Lindegaard
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 2.216

Review 7.  Complications of cranioplasty in relationship to traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  David Shepetovsky; Gianluca Mezzini; Lorenzo Magrassi
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 3.042

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.