BACKGROUND: Failure of skull base reconstruction is a life-threatening issue. This study describes surgical techniques utilising various types of galeal flaps and reports on outcome of these procedures for skull base reconstruction. METHOD: Clinical records of 136 patients (75 men, 61 women; mean age, 50.0 years) who required skull base reconstruction with galeal flaps were reviewed retrospectively. Patients had undergone skull base surgeries with simultaneous reconstruction for benign tumours in 77 patients, malignant tumours in 53, and other lesions in 6. We repaired dural defects using a fascial patch, and covered the skull base defects using various types of galeal flap according to the size and location of the skull base defects. Routine spinal drainage was not used in any patients. FINDINGS: Reconstruction was performed as planned in all patients. We utilised a galea frontalis flap in 17 patients, temporoparietal galeal flap in 95, temporoparietal galeal flap with calvarial bone in 9, and bipedicled temporoparietal galeal flap in 15. Postoperative complications included scalp wound necrosis in 8 patients (5.9%), transient leakage of cerebrospinal fluid in 3 (2.2%), and intracranial infection in 2 (1.5%). Necrosis of the galeal flaps was not encountered. CONCLUSIONS: Galea is a well-vascularised tissue with homogenous thickness. Since the galeal layer covers the entire head area, various types of galeal flap can be elevated to cover any size and location of skull base defect.
BACKGROUND: Failure of skull base reconstruction is a life-threatening issue. This study describes surgical techniques utilising various types of galeal flaps and reports on outcome of these procedures for skull base reconstruction. METHOD: Clinical records of 136 patients (75 men, 61 women; mean age, 50.0 years) who required skull base reconstruction with galeal flaps were reviewed retrospectively. Patients had undergone skull base surgeries with simultaneous reconstruction for benign tumours in 77 patients, malignant tumours in 53, and other lesions in 6. We repaired dural defects using a fascial patch, and covered the skull base defects using various types of galeal flap according to the size and location of the skull base defects. Routine spinal drainage was not used in any patients. FINDINGS: Reconstruction was performed as planned in all patients. We utilised a galea frontalis flap in 17 patients, temporoparietal galeal flap in 95, temporoparietal galeal flap with calvarial bone in 9, and bipedicled temporoparietal galeal flap in 15. Postoperative complications included scalp wound necrosis in 8 patients (5.9%), transient leakage of cerebrospinal fluid in 3 (2.2%), and intracranial infection in 2 (1.5%). Necrosis of the galeal flaps was not encountered. CONCLUSIONS: Galea is a well-vascularised tissue with homogenous thickness. Since the galeal layer covers the entire head area, various types of galeal flap can be elevated to cover any size and location of skull base defect.