Kimberly A Foster1, Samuel S Shin1, Benjamin Prabhu1, Andrew Fredrickson1, Raymond F Sekula2. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. Electronic address: sekularf@upmc.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A variety of biomaterials have been developed for cranial reconstruction after craniectomy, including polyethylene titanium mesh and calcium phosphate cement. This study sought to compare complication rates of calcium phosphate cement and titanium mesh cranioplasty in patients undergoing retromastoid craniectomy. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed clinical data from 672 consecutive patients who underwent retromastoid craniectomy at a single institution for microvascular decompression or tumor resection from July 2009 to July 2014. Of these, 336 patients received calcium phosphate cement cranioplasty and 336 underwent (polyethylene) mesh cranioplasty. Charts were abstracted for occurrence of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, wound infection and/or other wound complication, and the groups were compared. RESULTS: In the mesh cranioplasty group, there were 38 complications related to the surgical site, including 18 infections (5.4%), 20 patients (6%) with CSF leak or pseudomeningocele, and no (0%) other wound complications. In the cement cranioplasty cohort, 2 patients (0.6%) experienced wound infection, no patients (0%) had CSF leak, and 2 patients (0.6%) had other wound complications (including one sterile wound dehiscence and one reoperation for removal of excess cement). There was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of wound infection and CSF leak in the patients who underwent cement cranioplasty (P <0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Calcium phosphate cement cranioplasty offers an alternative to titanium cranioplasty and may reduce the risk of surgical site complication. Randomized, prospective comparisons of cement cranioplasty to traditional techniques are warranted.
OBJECTIVE: A variety of biomaterials have been developed for cranial reconstruction after craniectomy, including polyethylene titanium mesh and calcium phosphate cement. This study sought to compare complication rates of calcium phosphate cement and titanium mesh cranioplasty in patients undergoing retromastoid craniectomy. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed clinical data from 672 consecutive patients who underwent retromastoid craniectomy at a single institution for microvascular decompression or tumor resection from July 2009 to July 2014. Of these, 336 patients received calcium phosphate cement cranioplasty and 336 underwent (polyethylene) mesh cranioplasty. Charts were abstracted for occurrence of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, wound infection and/or other wound complication, and the groups were compared. RESULTS: In the mesh cranioplasty group, there were 38 complications related to the surgical site, including 18 infections (5.4%), 20 patients (6%) with CSF leak or pseudomeningocele, and no (0%) other wound complications. In the cement cranioplasty cohort, 2 patients (0.6%) experienced wound infection, no patients (0%) had CSF leak, and 2 patients (0.6%) had other wound complications (including one sterile wound dehiscence and one reoperation for removal of excess cement). There was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of wound infection and CSF leak in the patients who underwent cement cranioplasty (P <0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS:Calcium phosphate cement cranioplasty offers an alternative to titanium cranioplasty and may reduce the risk of surgical site complication. Randomized, prospective comparisons of cement cranioplasty to traditional techniques are warranted.
Authors: Daniel I Wolfson; Jordan A Magarik; Saniya S Godil; Hamid M Shah; Joseph S Neimat; Peter E Konrad; Dario J Englot Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2020-08-20
Authors: Wojciech Czyżewski; Jakub Jachimczyk; Zofia Hoffman; Michał Szymoniuk; Jakub Litak; Marcin Maciejewski; Krzysztof Kura; Radosław Rola; Kamil Torres Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 3.748