Literature DB >> 31189547

Deformation of cranioplasty titanium mesh in a paediatric patient following head trauma.

Basel Sharaf1, Malke Asaad1, Joseph Banuelos1, Jesse Meaike1.   

Abstract

Decompressive craniectomy is a life-saving procedure performed to treat intracranial hypertension caused by a variety of conditions. Subsequent cranioplasty reconstruction is needed for brain protection. Different alloplastic materials with different advantages and disadvantages are available for cranial reconstruction. We present the first case of a deformed titanium cranioplasty mesh in a paediatric patient following head trauma. Children who have undergone cranioplasty reconstruction should be counselled to wear a protective helmet when involved in contact sports or activities that may put their implant at risk of trauma. © BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  neurosurgery; oral and maxillofacial surgery; plastic and reconstructive surgery; surgery

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31189547      PMCID: PMC6577318          DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2019-230421

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Case Rep        ISSN: 1757-790X


  26 in total

1.  Long-term complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.

Authors:  Stephen Honeybul; Kwok M Ho
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 5.269

Review 2.  Decompressive craniectomy in acute brain injury.

Authors:  D A Brown; E F M Wijdicks
Journal:  Handb Clin Neurol       Date:  2017

3.  Cranioplasty with custom-made titanium plates--14 years experience.

Authors:  Anthony Wiggins; Richard Austerberry; David Morrison; Kwok M Ho; Stephen Honeybul
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Role of split calvarial graft in reconstruction of craniofacial defects.

Authors:  Nanda Kishore Sahoo; Mohan Rangan
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.046

5.  Alloplastic Cranioplasty Reconstruction: A Systematic Review Comparing Outcomes With Titanium Mesh, Polymethyl Methacrylate, Polyether Ether Ketone, and Norian Implants in 3591 Adult Patients.

Authors:  Jeremie D Oliver; Joseph Banuelos; Amjed Abu-Ghname; Krishna S Vyas; Basel Sharaf
Journal:  Ann Plast Surg       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.539

6.  Helmet Wear and Craniofacial Trauma Burden: A Plea for Regulations Mandating Protective Helmet Wear.

Authors:  Jamison Anne Harvey; Waleed Gibreel; Ali Charafeddine; Basel Sharaf
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2017-03-29

Review 7.  Trepanation Procedures/Outcomes: Comparison of Prehistoric Peru with Other Ancient, Medieval, and American Civil War Cranial Surgery.

Authors:  David S Kushner; John W Verano; Anne R Titelbaum
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 2.104

8.  Stiffness and strength of cranioplastic implant systems in comparison to cranial bone.

Authors:  Johan Persson; Benedikt Helgason; Håkan Engqvist; Stephen J Ferguson; Cecilia Persson
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2017-12-13       Impact factor: 2.078

9.  A comparison and cost analysis of cranioplasty techniques: autologous bone versus custom computer-generated implants.

Authors:  Mirko S Gilardino; Mihiran Karunanayake; Taghreed Al-Humsi; Ali Izadpanah; Hasan Al-Ajmi; Judith Marcoux; Jeffrey Atkinson; Jean-Pierre Farmer
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.046

10.  Comparison of Autogenous and Alloplastic Cranioplasty Materials Following Impact Testing.

Authors:  Robert D Wallace; Craig Salt; Petros Konofaos
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.046

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.