Literature DB >> 31529096

A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Titanium Mesh and Custom Implants for Cranioplasty.

Clayton L Rosinski1, Saavan Patel1, Brett Geever1, Ryan G Chiu1, Anisse N Chaker1, Jack Zakrzewski1, David M Rosenberg1, Rown Parola1, Koral Shah1, Mandana Behbahani1, Ankit I Mehta1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Autologous bone removed during craniectomy is often the material of choice in cranioplasty procedures. However, when the patient's own bone is not appropriate (infection and resorption), an alloplastic graft must be utilized. Common options include titanium mesh and polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-based custom flaps. Often, neurosurgeons must decide whether to use a titanium or custom implant, with limited direction from the literature.
OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes of synthetic cranioplasties performed with titanium or vs custom implants.
METHODS: Ten-year retrospective comparison of patients undergoing synthetic cranioplasty with titanium or custom implants.
RESULTS: A total of 82 patients were identified for review, 61 (74.4%) receiving titanium cranioplasty and 21 (25.6%) receiving custom implants. Baseline demographics and comorbidities of the 2 groups did not differ significantly, although multiple surgical characteristics did (size of defect, indication for craniotomy) and were controlled for via a 2:1 mesh-to-custom propensity matching scheme in which 36 titanium cranioplasty patients were compared to 18 custom implant patients. The cranioplasty infection rate of the custom group (27.8%) was significantly greater (P = .005) than that of the titanium group (0.0%). None of the other differences in measured complications reached significance. Discomfort, a common cause of reoperation in the titanium group, did not result in reoperation in any of the patients receiving custom implants.
CONCLUSION: Infection rates are higher among patients receiving custom implants compared to those receiving titanium meshes. The latter should be informed of potential postsurgical discomfort, which can be managed nonsurgically and is not associated with return to the operating room.
Copyright © 2019 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cranioplasty; Infection; Outcomes; PEEK; Synthetic Cranioplasty; Titanium

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31529096     DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyz358

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  8 in total

1.  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 2.  Customized Barrier Membrane (Titanium Alloy, Poly Ether-Ether Ketone and Unsintered Hydroxyapatite/Poly-l-Lactide) for Guided Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Yilin Shi; Jin Liu; Mi Du; Shengben Zhang; Yue Liu; Hu Yang; Ruiwen Shi; Yuanyuan Guo; Feng Song; Yajun Zhao; Jing Lan
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-06-28

3.  A Perioperative Paradigm of Cranioplasty With Polyetheretherketone: Comprehensive Management for Preventing Postoperative Complications.

Authors:  Zhenghui He; Yuxiao Ma; Chun Yang; Jiyuan Hui; Qing Mao; Guoyi Gao; Jiyao Jiang; Junfeng Feng
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-03-21

4.  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

5.  Subgaleal Effusion and Brain Midline Shift After Cranioplasty: A Retrospective Study Between Polyetheretherketone Cranioplasty and Titanium Cranioplasty After Decompressive Craniectomy.

Authors:  Tao Ji; Peiwen Yao; Yu Zeng; Zhouqi Qian; Ke Wang; Liang Gao
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-07-21

6.  Tethered brain: disentangling unintentional brain-mesh interfaces. Illustrative case.

Authors:  Samantha E Spellicy; Joseph R Kilianski; Rachel Poston; Debra Moore-Hill; Fernando L Vale
Journal:  J Neurosurg Case Lessons       Date:  2021-06-14

7.  Outcome and risk factors of complications after cranioplasty with polyetheretherketone and titanium mesh: A single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Shun Yao; Qiyu Zhang; Yiying Mai; Hongyi Yang; Yilin Li; Minglin Zhang; Run Zhang
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-09-21       Impact factor: 4.086

8.  Evaluation of titanium cranioplasty and polyetheretherketone cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury: A prospective, multicenter, non-randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jingguo Yang; Tong Sun; Yikai Yuan; Xuepei Li; Hang Yu; Junwen Guan
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 1.817

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.