Literature DB >> 29374609

Dural Repair in Cranial Surgery Is Associated with Moderate Rates of Complications with Both Autologous and Nonautologous Dural Substitutes.

Daniel Azzam1, Prasanth Romiyo1, Thien Nguyen1, John P Sheppard1, Yasmine Alkhalid1, Carlito Lagman1, Giyarpuram N Prashant1, Isaac Yang2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Duraplasty, a common neurosurgical intervention, involves synthetic or biological graft placement to ensure dural closure. The objective of this study is to advance our understanding of the use of dural substitutes in cranial surgery.
METHODS: The PubMed database was systematically searched to identify studies published over the past decade (2007-2017) that described duraplasty procedures. Clinical data were disaggregated and analyzed for the comparisons of biological versus synthetic grafts.
RESULTS: A total of 462 cases were included in the quantitative synthesis. Overall, the most common indication for duraplasty was tumor resection (53%). Allografts were more frequently used in decompression for Chiari malformations compared with xenografts and synthetic grafts (P < 0.001). Xenografts were more frequently used in decompressive hemicraniectomy procedures for evacuation of acute subdural hematomas over allografts and synthetics (P < 0.001). Synthetic grafts were more frequently used in tumor cases than biological grafts (P = 0.002). The cumulative complication rate for dural substitutes of all types was 11%. There were no significant differences in complication rates among the 3 types of dural substitutes.
CONCLUSIONS: Dural substitutes are commonly used to ensure dural closure in a variety of cranial procedures. This study provides greater insight into duraplasty practices and highlights the moderate complication rate associated with the procedure. Future studies are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of such procedures in larger prospective cohorts.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dura mater; Dural graft; Dural substitute; Duraplasty

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29374609     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.115

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


  5 in total

1.  Absorbable Artificial Dura Versus Nonabsorbable Artificial Dura in Decompressive Craniectomy for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Two Centers.

Authors:  Zhong-Ding Zhang; Li-Yan Zhao; Yi-Ru Liu; Jing-Yu Zhang; Shang-Hui Xie; Yan-Qi Lin; Zhuo-Ning Tang; Huang-Yi Fang; Yue Yang; Shi-Ze Li; Jian-Xi Liu; Han-Song Sheng
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-07-01

2.  Asymptomatic superficial siderosis after posterior fossa tumor resection: illustrative case.

Authors:  Anshit Goyal; Cody L Nesvick; Joshua A Spear; David J Daniels
Journal:  J Neurosurg Case Lessons       Date:  2021-05-03

3.  Rapid closure technique in suboccipital decompression.

Authors:  Martin Vychopen; Alexis Hadjiathanasiou; Simon Brandecker; Valeri Borger; Patrick Schuss; Hartmut Vatter; Erdem Güresir
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-09-25       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Extradural abscess following synthetic fabric duraplasty.

Authors:  Shabal Sapkota; Mitesh Karn
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-05-25

5.  Comparison of Biomechanical Properties of Dura Mater Substitutes and Cranial Human Dura Mater : An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Ceren Kizmazoglu; Hasan Emre Aydin; Ismail Kaya; Murat Atar; Bugra Husemoglu; Orhan Kalemci; Gulden Sozer; Hasan Havitcioglu
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2019-10-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.