Literature DB >> 31082551

Long-Term Complications of Cranioplasty Using Stored Autologous Bone Graft, Three-Dimensional Polymethyl Methacrylate, or Titanium Mesh After Decompressive Craniectomy: A Single-Center Experience After 596 Procedures.

Mun-Chun Yeap1, Po-Hsun Tu1, Zhuo-Hao Liu1, Po-Chuan Hsieh1, Yu-Tse Liu1, Ching-Yi Lee1, Hung-Yi Lai1, Chun-Ting Chen1, Yin-Cheng Huang1, Kuo-Chen Wei1, Chieh-Tsai Wu1, Ching-Chang Chen2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cranioplasty is a technically simple procedure intended to repair defects of the skull to provide protection after craniectomy, improve functional outcomes, and restore cosmesis. Several materials have been used for the restoration of skull defects, including autologous bone grafts (AGs), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) flaps, and titanium mesh (T-mesh). However, the long-term results of cranioplasty after use of these materials are controversial.
METHODS: Medical records of 596 patients who underwent cranioplasty at our medical center between 2009 and 2015 with at least 2.5 years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into 3 groups according to the materials used: AG, three-dimensional PMMA, and T-mesh. Demographic and clinical characteristics and postoperative complications were analyzed.
RESULTS: Cranioplasty with AG had the highest bone flap depression rate (4.9%; P = 0.02) and was associated with a 26% long-term bone flap resorption. Younger age was a risk factor for bone flap resorption. T-mesh had a higher risk of postoperative skin erosion and bone exposure (17%; P = 0.004). Patients with diabetes, previous craniotomy, or hydrocephalus showed a higher risk of postoperative skin erosion. PMMA was associated with the highest rate of postoperative infection (14.4% <3 months, 28.1% >3 months; P < 0.05), and previous craniotomy may increase the infection risk after cranioplasty with PMMA.
CONCLUSIONS: Complications after cranioplasty are high, and the various types of cranioplasty materials used are associated with different complications. Surgeons need to be aware of these potential complications and should choose the appropriate material for each individual patient.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D polymethyl methacrylate; Autologous bone graft; Complication; Cranioplasty; Titanium mesh

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31082551     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.005

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


  10 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.  Complications and cosmetic outcomes of materials used in cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy-a systematic review, pairwise meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jakob V E Gerstl; Luis F Rendon; Shane M Burke; Joanne Doucette; Rania A Mekary; Timothy R Smith
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 2.216

4.  Analysis of PMMA versus CaP titanium-enhanced implants for cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Authors:  Dominik Wesp; Harald Krenzlin; Dragan Jankovic; Malte Ottenhausen; Max Jägersberg; Florian Ringel; Naureen Keric
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 2.800

Review 5.  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

6.  Efficacy of 3D-Printed Titanium Mesh-Type Patient-Specific Implant for Cranioplasty.

Authors:  Hong-Gyu Yoon; Yong Ko; Young-Soo Kim; Koang-Hum Bak; Hyoung-Joon Chun; Min-Kyun Na; Sook Yang; Hyeong-Joong Yi; Kyu-Sun Choi
Journal:  Korean J Neurotrauma       Date:  2021-09-09

7.  Histological Processing of CAD/CAM Titanium Scaffold after Long-Term Failure in Cranioplasty.

Authors:  Heilwig Fischer; Claudius Steffen; Katharina Schmidt-Bleek; Georg N Duda; Max Heiland; Carsten Rendenbach; Jan-Dirk Raguse
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.623

8.  Reconstruction of a Craniofacial Defect Using Rapid Prototyping and an Autograft - A Case Report.

Authors:  Jayant N Palaskar; Swapna N Athavale; Nikhil P Joshi; Anuja P Gunjal
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2022-02-01

9.  Cranial Screw Migration along the Subdural Peritoneal Shunt Catheter in a Pediatric Patient.

Authors:  Buse Baykoca-Arslan; Muhittin Belirgen
Journal:  J Neurosci Rural Pract       Date:  2022-08-07

10.  Downregulation of the LncRNA MEG3 Promotes Osteogenic Differentiation of BMSCs and Bone Repairing by Activating Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway.

Authors:  Juan Liu; Xin Qi; Xiao-Hong Wang; Hong-Sheng Miao; Zi-Chao Xue; Le-Le Zhang; San-Hu Zhao; Liang-Hao Wu; Guo-Yi Gao; Mei-Qing Lou; Cheng-Qing Yi
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 4.241

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.