T K Bandyopadhyay1, G K Thapliyal2, A K Dubey3. 1. CO, 200 MDC, C/o 56 APO, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune-411 040. 2. Professor & Head, Department of Dental Surgery, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune-411 040. 3. Senior Adviser(Neurosurgery), Command Hospital(Southern Command), Pune.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of heat cured 'poly methyl methacrylate resin prosthesis and to assess the acceptability of the indigenously manufactured titanium mini bone plate and screws in patients treated for repair of cranial defects. METHODS: 17 patients with cranial defect were treated for reconstruction of the skull defect with two types of implants i.e. Acrylic resin plate prosthesis and titanium minibone plates, either in combination or singularly. In these cases, the skull defects resulted from trauma (88.23%) or due to ablative tumour surgery (11.96%). Acrylic implant was used in 12 cases (70.85%), titanium plates and screws in 2 cases (11.76%) and a combination of both of the above in 3 cases (17.64). RESULTS: The primary reconstruction was carried out in 2 cases (11.96%) and secondary reconstruction was done in 15 cases (88.23%). Majority of the cases underwent secondary reconstruction because of the initial surgical emergency requiring quick debulking and closure. In 2 cases where primary reconstruction was done, the second surgery could be avoided with gratifying results. CONCLUSION: 70.85% underwent reconstruction with polymethyl methacrylate resin prosthesis and in the rest either titanium plates were used singly or in combination. Only in one patient, there was rejection of the implant due to infection. In 94% cases the graft was well taken up with excellent results.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of heat cured 'poly methyl methacrylate resin prosthesis and to assess the acceptability of the indigenously manufactured titanium mini bone plate and screws in patients treated for repair of cranial defects. METHODS: 17 patients with cranial defect were treated for reconstruction of the skull defect with two types of implants i.e. Acrylic resin plate prosthesis and titanium minibone plates, either in combination or singularly. In these cases, the skull defects resulted from trauma (88.23%) or due to ablative tumour surgery (11.96%). Acrylic implant was used in 12 cases (70.85%), titanium plates and screws in 2 cases (11.76%) and a combination of both of the above in 3 cases (17.64). RESULTS: The primary reconstruction was carried out in 2 cases (11.96%) and secondary reconstruction was done in 15 cases (88.23%). Majority of the cases underwent secondary reconstruction because of the initial surgical emergency requiring quick debulking and closure. In 2 cases where primary reconstruction was done, the second surgery could be avoided with gratifying results. CONCLUSION: 70.85% underwent reconstruction with polymethyl methacrylate resin prosthesis and in the rest either titanium plates were used singly or in combination. Only in one patient, there was rejection of the implant due to infection. In 94% cases the graft was well taken up with excellent results.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cranial prosthesis; Cranial reconstruction; Mini bone plates
Authors: P F New; B R Rosen; T J Brady; F S Buonanno; J P Kistler; C T Burt; W S Hinshaw; J H Newhouse; G M Pohost; J M Taveras Journal: Radiology Date: 1983-04 Impact factor: 11.105