Literature DB >> 19575129

Bioabsorbable osteofixation devices in craniosynostosis. Clinical experience in 216 cases.

M J Muñoz-Casado1, A I Romance, J I García-Recuero.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The pursuit of bone fixation systems capable of affording appropriate stability for osteosynthesis has gone through several stages from the use of metal wires, plates, and screws to the current stage of bioabsorbable systems. In our Pediatric Neurosurgery Service and Craniofacial Surgery Unit we began employing these systems in June 1997. The object of this paper is to present a review of the bioabsorbable materials most commonly used in pediatric age, and more specifically in treating craniosynostosis, to describe the characteristics of each one of them and our experience. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From June 1997 to May 2006 we implanted bioabsorbable fixation systems in 216 patients diagnosed with craniosynostosis. Age at treatment ranged between 4 and 24 months (mean age 6.38 months). Brain computed tomography (CT) scans, and three-dimensional (3-D) reconstruction of CT scans were performed before and after treatment. An 82: 18 L-lactic acid: glycolic acid copolymer was used in 92.2% of these cases, and a 70:30 L-lactic acid: D-lactic acid copolymer was used in the remaining 7.8% of cases. The follow-up of the patients ranged between six months and five years.
RESULTS: There was no displacement of bioabsorbable plates or screws in any case. In one case (0.46%), radiological imaging revealed osteolysis underneath the implant eight months after the surgical procedure. Prominences caused by the plates and screws employed were visible in two cases (0.93%). We found fractures in the osteosynthesis mesh in two patients (0.93%). Four patients (1.85%) presented local inflammation. No alterations of cranial morphology secondary to inadequate stability were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: 1) Bioabsorbable fixation systems provide excellent stability during the bone "healing" period, without a higher complication rate than with other systems. 2) They help the bone grafts keep their remodeled shape. 3) They promote reossification by preventing the bone grafts from moving after osteosynthesis. 4) No interference with normal growth of the cranial vault has been observed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19575129     DOI: 10.1016/s1130-1473(09)70164-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurocirugia (Astur)        ISSN: 1130-1473            Impact factor:   0.553


  3 in total

Review 1.  Distraction Osteogenesis Versus Orthognathic Surgery: Demystifying Differences in Concepts, Techniques and Outcomes.

Authors:  Manikandhan Ramanathan; Godwin Alex Kiruba; Amelia Christabel; Anantanarayanan Parameswaran; Sanjanaa Kapoor; Hermann F Sailer
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2020-07-21

2.  Using bioabsorbable fixation systems in the treatment of pediatric skull deformities leads to good outcomes and low morbidity.

Authors:  Melanie G Hayden Gephart; Joslyn I Woodard; Robert T Arrigo; H Peter Lorenz; Stephen A Schendel; Michael S B Edwards; Raphael Guzman
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2012-10-26       Impact factor: 1.475

3.  Occipitofrontal switch for correction of anterior plagiocephaly planned through virtual mock surgery.

Authors:  Debarati Chattopadhyay; Madhubari Vathulya; Praveen Jayaprakash; Akshay Kapoor; Vaishali Verma; Rajnish Arora
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-04-08
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.