Literature DB >> 33548008

Cranioplasty with three-dimensional customised mould for polymethylmethacrylate implant: a series of 16 consecutive patients with cost-effectiveness consideration.

Erasmo Barros da Silva Júnior1, Afonso Henrique de Aragão2, Marcelo de Paula Loureiro3, Caetano Silva Lobo4, Ana Flávia Oliveti4, Rafael Martinelli de Oliveira4, Ricardo Ramina2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Different methods of cranioplasty for the reconstruction of bony skull defects exist. In the absence of the autologous bone flap, a customised manufactured implant may be the optimal choice, but this implant has several limitations regarding its technical standardisation and better cost-effectiveness.
METHODS: This study presents a series of 16 consecutive patients who had undergone cranioplasty with customised three-dimensional (3D) template moulds for polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) implants manufactured after 3D modelling on a specific workstation. The virtual images were transformed into a two-piece physical model using a 3D printer for the biomaterials. PMMA implant was produced intraoperatively with the custom mould. Cosmetic results were analysed by comparing pre- and postoperative 3D computed tomography (CT) images and asking if the patient was satisfied with the result.
RESULTS: The average total time for planning and production of customised mould was 10 days. The 16 patients were satisfied with the result, and CT images presented harmonious symmetry when comparing pre- and postoperative scans. Cases of postoperative infection, bleeding, or reoperation in this series were not observed.
CONCLUSION: Cranioplasty with high-technology customised 3D moulds for PMMA implants can allow for an aesthetic reconstruction with a fast and cost-effective manufacturing process and possibly with low complication rates.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D printing; Cranioplasty; Customised implant; Polymethylmethacrylate; Reconstructive surgery; Three-dimensional template

Year:  2021        PMID: 33548008      PMCID: PMC7866687          DOI: 10.1186/s41205-021-00096-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  3D Print Med        ISSN: 2365-6271


  38 in total

1.  Management and prevention of cranioplasty infections.

Authors:  Paolo Frassanito; Flavia Fraschetti; Federico Bianchi; Francesca Giovannenze; Massimo Caldarelli; Giancarlo Scoppettuolo
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 1.475

2.  Cranioplasty with acrylic plates.

Authors:  C W ELKINS; J E CAMERON
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1946-05       Impact factor: 5.115

3.  Reconstruction of large cranial defects with poly-methyl-methacrylate (PMMA) using a rapid prototyping model and a new technique for intraoperative implant modeling.

Authors:  Claudia Unterhofer; Christoph Wipplinger; Michael Verius; Wolfgang Recheis; Claudius Thomé; Martin Ortler
Journal:  Neurol Neurochir Pol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 1.621

Review 4.  Outcomes following polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cranioplasty: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maria Punchak; Lawrance K Chung; Carlito Lagman; Timothy T Bui; Jorge Lazareff; Kameron Rezzadeh; Reza Jarrahy; Isaac Yang
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 1.961

5.  Customized cranioplasty implants using three-dimensional printers and polymethyl-methacrylate casting.

Authors:  Bum-Joon Kim; Ki-Sun Hong; Kyung-Jae Park; Dong-Hyuk Park; Yong-Gu Chung; Shin-Hyuk Kang
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2012-12-31

6.  Cranioplasty With Autogenous Frozen and Autoclaved Bone: Management and Treatment Outcomes.

Authors:  Nanda Kishore Sahoo; Ankur Thakral; Lalit Janjani
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.046

7.  Complications following cranioplasty using autologous bone or polymethylmethacrylate--retrospective experience from a single center.

Authors:  Lukas Bobinski; Lars-Owe D Koskinen; Peter Lindvall
Journal:  Clin Neurol Neurosurg       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 1.876

8.  Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large cranial defects: a 3-center experience.

Authors:  Guy Rosenthal; Ivan Ng; Samuel Moscovici; Kah K Lee; Twyila Lay; Christine Martin; Geoffrey T Manley
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 9.  Complications with PMMA compared with other materials used in cranioplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rafaella de Souza Leão; Juliana Raposo Souto Maior; Cleidiel Aparecido de Araújo Lemos; Belmiro Cavalcanti do Egito Vasconcelos; Marcos Antônio Japiassú Resende Montes; Eduardo Piza Pellizzer; Sandra Lúcia Dantas Moraes
Journal:  Braz Oral Res       Date:  2018-06-07

10.  Cranioplasty: morbidity and failure.

Authors:  Stephen Honeybul; Kwok M Ho
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  2016-05-24       Impact factor: 1.596

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Characterisation of Selected Materials in Medical Applications.

Authors:  Kacper Kroczek; Paweł Turek; Damian Mazur; Jacek Szczygielski; Damian Filip; Robert Brodowski; Krzysztof Balawender; Łukasz Przeszłowski; Bogumił Lewandowski; Stanisław Orkisz; Artur Mazur; Grzegorz Budzik; Józef Cebulski; Mariusz Oleksy
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-09       Impact factor: 4.967

2.  Patient specific Polymethyl methacrylate customised cranioplasty using 3D printed silicone moulds: Technical note.

Authors:  Alba Scerrati; Francesco Travaglini; Clarissa Ann Elisabeth Gelmi; Andrea Lombardo; Pasquale De Bonis; Michele Alessandro Cavallo; Paolo Zamboni
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2021-11-24       Impact factor: 2.483

3.  Customized alloplastic cranioplasty of large bone defects by 3D-printed prefabricated mold template after posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy: A technical note.

Authors:  Bruno Splavski; Goran Lakicevic; Marko Kovacevic; Damir Godec
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2022-04-22

4.  Biomechanical Evaluation of Patient-Specific Polymethylmethacrylate Cranial Implants for Virtual Surgical Planning: An In-Vitro Study.

Authors:  Bilal Msallem; Michaela Maintz; Florian S Halbeisen; Simon Meyer; Guido R Sigron; Neha Sharma; Shuaishuai Cao; Florian M Thieringer
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 3.623

Review 5.  Low-Cost Cranioplasty-A Systematic Review of 3D Printing in Medicine.

Authors:  Wojciech Czyżewski; Jakub Jachimczyk; Zofia Hoffman; Michał Szymoniuk; Jakub Litak; Marcin Maciejewski; Krzysztof Kura; Radosław Rola; Kamil Torres
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 3.748

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.