Literature DB >> 27647038

Complications After In Vivo and Ex Vivo Autologous Bone Flap Storage for Cranioplasty: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature.

Brian Corliss1, Timothy Gooldy2, Sasha Vaziri1, Paul Kubilis1, Gregory Murad1, Kyle Fargen3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The most common bone flap storage strategies after decompressive hemicraniectomy for malignant intracranial hypertension include freezer cryopreservation (CP) and subcutaneous abdominal implantation (AP). Numerous series have reported on patient outcomes after cranioplasty in terms of infection, cosmesis, and resorption. This meta-analysis compares published outcomes of bone flap CP and subcutaneous storage with respect to efficacy and complication risk in patients undergoing cranioplasty after hemicraniectomy.
METHODS: A systematic review was performed using PubMed-searchable studies that included bone flap storage methods and outcome data for cranioplasties performed between 1975 and 2015.
RESULTS: A total of 48 studies including 5346 patients were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 4096 underwent cranioplasty with an autologous flap. Mean bone flap storage times for CP and AP flaps were 69.9 and 69.7 days. Mean follow-up time for CP and AP flaps was 16.9 and 16.5 months. No statistically significant differences were found when comparing CP with subcutaneous storage of bone flaps with respect to percentage of patients developing infection (7.3% vs. 7.1%), percentage of patients needing revision surgery (15.9% vs. 7.6%), and percentage of patients experiencing resorption (9.7% vs. 7.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest and most robust review comparing published outcomes of CP and subcutaneous storage of bone flaps in patients who have undergone decompressive hemicraniectomy. This review found no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes (infection, resorption, reoperation) when comparing storage methods for bone flap preservation. This study suggests that both strategies may be used safely and successfully. Copyright Â
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autologous; Bone flap preservation; Cranioplasty; Decompressive craniectomy; Infection; Resorption; Subcutaneous

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27647038     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  15 in total

Review 1.  The storage of skull bone flaps for autologous cranioplasty: literature review.

Authors:  Vicente Mirabet; Daniel García; Nuria Yagüe; Luis Roberto Larrea; Cristina Arbona; Carlos Botella
Journal:  Cell Tissue Bank       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 1.522

2.  Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jack Henry; Michael Amoo; Adam Murphy; David P O'Brien
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 2.216

Review 3.  Bioinspired Collagen Scaffolds in Cranial Bone Regeneration: From Bedside to Bench.

Authors:  Justine C Lee; Elizabeth J Volpicelli
Journal:  Adv Healthc Mater       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 9.933

4.  Bone Flap Preservation in Subcutaneous Abdominal Pocket for Decompressive Craniectomy.

Authors:  Yohei Ishikawa; Hideaki Kamochi; Ryuji Ishizaki; Takafumi Wataya
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-07-20

Review 5.  Bone Flap Resorption in Pediatric Patients Following Autologous Cranioplasty.

Authors:  David S Hersh; Hanna J Anderson; Graeme F Woodworth; Jonathan E Martin; Yusuf M Khan
Journal:  Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)       Date:  2021-04-15       Impact factor: 2.703

Review 6.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of factors involved in bone flap resorption after decompressive craniectomy.

Authors:  Francesco Signorelli; Martina Giordano; Valerio Maria Caccavella; Eleonora Ioannoni; Camilla Gelormini; Anselmo Caricato; Alessandro Olivi; Nicola Montano
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.042

7.  Establishment and Characteristic Analysis of a Dog Model for Autologous Homologous Cranioplasty.

Authors:  Wenyu Zhu; Jie Wu; Haifeng Zhao; Weihua Wang; Lichun Lu; Ke Yan; Yin Yin; Qiang Huang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Comparison of two different titanium cranioplasty methods: Custom-made titanium prostheses versus precurved titanium mesh.

Authors:  Domenico Policicchio; Gina Casu; Giosuè Dipellegrini; Artan Doda; Giampiero Muggianu; Riccardo Boccaletti
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2020-06-13

Review 9.  Decompressive craniectomy for acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  Thomas Beez; Christopher Munoz-Bendix; Hans-Jakob Steiger; Kerim Beseoglu
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2019-06-07       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 10.  Cranioplasty Following Decompressive Craniectomy.

Authors:  Corrado Iaccarino; Angelos G Kolias; Louis-Georges Roumy; Kostas Fountas; Amos Olufemi Adeleye
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.