Literature DB >> 33009932

Cranioplasty following ventriculoperitoneal shunting: lessons learned.

Dorian Hirschmann1, Beate Kranawetter1, Constanze Kirchschlager1, Matthias Tomschik1, Jonathan Wais1, Fabian Winter1, Matthias Millesi1, Johannes Herta1, Karl Roessler1, Christian Dorfer2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Cranioplasty (CP) is considered as a straightforward and technically unchallenging operation; however, complication rates are high reaching up to 56%. Presence of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) and timing of CP are reported risk factors for complications. Pressure gradients and scarring at the site of the cranial defect seem to be critical in this context. The authors present their experiences and lessons learned.
METHODS: A consecutive series of all patients who underwent CP at the authors' institution between 2002 and 2017 were included in this retrospective analysis. Complications were defined as all events that required reoperation. Logistic regression analysis and chi-squared test were conducted to evaluate the complication rates according to suspected risk factors.
RESULTS: A total of 302 patients underwent cranioplasty between 2002 and 2017. The overall complication rate was 17.5%. Complications included epi-/subdural fluid collection (7.3%) including hemorrhage (4.6%) and hygroma (2.6%), bone graft resorption (5.3%), bone graft infection (2.0%), and hydrocephalus (5.7%). Overall, 57 patients (18.9%) had undergone shunt implantation prior to CP. The incidence of epi-/subdural fluid collection was 19.3% in patients with VPS and 4.5% in patients without VPS, OR 5.1 (95% CI 2.1-12.4). Incidence of hygroma was higher in patients who underwent early CP. Patients with temporary shunt ligation for CP did not suffer from complications.
CONCLUSION: CP in patients with a VPS remains a high-risk procedure. Any effort to understand the pressure dynamics and to reduce factors that may trigger the formation of a large epidural space must be undertaken.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complications; Cranioplasty; Epidural hemorrhage; Fluid collection; Shunt

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33009932      PMCID: PMC7815555          DOI: 10.1007/s00701-020-04597-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)        ISSN: 0001-6268            Impact factor:   2.216


  15 in total

1.  Evaluation of simultaneous cranioplasty and ventriculoperitoneal shunt procedures.

Authors:  Juneyoung Heo; Sukh Que Park; Sung Jin Cho; Jae Chil Chang; Hyung-Ki Park
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 5.115

2.  Decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of traumatic brain injury: does an age limit exist?

Authors:  Pasquale De Bonis; Angelo Pompucci; Annunziato Mangiola; Q Giorgio D'Alessandris; Luigi Rigante; Carmelo Anile
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.115

Review 3.  Cranioplasty Infection and Resorption Are Associated with the Presence of a Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Christian M Mustroph; James G Malcolm; Rima S Rindler; Jason K Chu; Jonathan A Grossberg; Gustavo Pradilla; Faiz U Ahmad
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2017-04-19       Impact factor: 2.104

Review 4.  Decompressive Craniectomy in Neurocritical Care.

Authors:  Erik G Hayman; David B Kurland; Zachary Grunwald; Sebastian Urday; Kevin N Sheth; J Marc Simard
Journal:  Semin Neurol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.420

5.  Timing of cranioplasty: a 10.75-year single-center analysis of 754 patients.

Authors:  Ryan P Morton; Isaac Josh Abecassis; Josiah F Hanson; Jason K Barber; Mimi Chen; Cory M Kelly; John D Nerva; Samuel N Emerson; Chibawanye I Ene; Michael R Levitt; Michelle M Chowdhary; Andrew L Ko; Randall M Chesnut
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.

Authors:  Mario Zanaty; Nohra Chalouhi; Robert M Starke; Shannon W Clark; Cory D Bovenzi; Mark Saigh; Eric Schwartz; Emily S I Kunkel; Alexandra S Efthimiadis-Budike; Pascal Jabbour; Richard Dalyai; Robert H Rosenwasser; Stavropoula I Tjoumakaris
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 5.115

Review 7.  Complications following cranioplasty and relationship to timing: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  James G Malcolm; Rima S Rindler; Jason K Chu; Jonathan A Grossberg; Gustavo Pradilla; Faiz U Ahmad
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 1.961

8.  Outcomes of cranial repair after craniectomy.

Authors:  Victor Chang; Paul Hartzfeld; Marianne Langlois; Asim Mahmood; Donald Seyfried
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.115

9.  Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy: analysis of 62 cases.

Authors:  M Reid Gooch; Greg E Gin; Tyler J Kenning; John W German
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 4.047

Review 10.  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

View more
  1 in total

1.  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

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.