Literature DB >> 33946170

State-of-Art of Standard and Innovative Materials Used in Cranioplasty.

Valentina Siracusa1, Giuseppe Maimone2, Vincenzo Antonelli2.   

Abstract

Cranioplasty is the surgical technology employed to repair a traumatic head injury, cerebrovascular disease, oncology resection and congenital anomalies. Actually, different bone substitutes are used, either derived from biological products such as hydroxyapatite and demineralized bone matrix or synthetic ones such as sulfate or phosphate ceramics and polymer-based substitutes. Considering that the choice of the best material for cranioplasty is controversial, linked to the best operation procedure, the intent of this review was to report the outcome of research conducted on materials used for such applications, comparing the most used materials. The most interesting challenge is to preserve the mechanical properties while improving the bioactivity, porosity, biocompatibility, antibacterial properties, lowering thickness and costs. Among polymer materials, polymethylmethacrylate and polyetheretherketone are the most motivating, due to their biocompatibility, rigidity and toughness. Other biomaterials, with ecofriendly attributes, such as polycaprolactone and polylactic acid have been investigated, due to their microstructure that mimic the trabecular bone, encouraging vascularization and cell-cell communications. Taking into consideration that each material must be selected for specific clinical use, the main limitation remains the defects and the lack of vascularization, consequently porous synthetic substitutes could be an interesting way to support a faster and wider vascularization, with the aim to improve patient prognosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomaterials; cranial defect; cranioplasty; neurosurgery; polycaprolactone (PCL); polyethereketoneketone (PEKK); polyetheretherketone (PEEK); polyglycolide (PGA); polylactic acid (PLA); polymers; polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA); skull reconstruction; synthetic cranioplasty

Year:  2021        PMID: 33946170     DOI: 10.3390/polym13091452

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Polymers (Basel)        ISSN: 2073-4360            Impact factor:   4.329


  47 in total

1.  Porous polyethylene implants in facial reconstruction: Outcome and complications.

Authors:  Angela Ridwan-Pramana; Jan Wolff; Ashkan Raziei; Claire E Ashton-James; Tymour Forouzanfar
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Biomechanical evaluation of titanium, biodegradable plate and screw, and cyanoacrylate glue fixation systems in craniofacial surgery.

Authors:  A K Gosain; L Song; M A Corrao; F A Pintar
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 3.  Cranioplasty.

Authors:  Matthew Piazza; M Sean Grady
Journal:  Neurosurg Clin N Am       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.509

4.  Cranioplasty Using Customized 3-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Implants: An International Collaboration Effort to Improve Neurosurgical Care.

Authors:  Bach Nguyen; Omar Ashraf; Robin Richards; Hoanh Tra; Trong Huynh
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 2.104

5.  All-in-one surgical guide: A new method for cranial vault resection and reconstruction.

Authors:  Alessandro Tel; Fabio Costa; Salvatore Sembronio; Andrea Lazzarotto; Massimo Robiony
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 6.  Calcium phosphate cements in skull reconstruction: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ahmed M Afifi; Chad R Gordon; Landon S Pryor; Walter Sweeney; Frank A Papay; James E Zins
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Biomechanical testing of alloplastic PMMA cranioplasty materials.

Authors:  Barry L Eppley
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.046

8.  Analyses of the factors influencing bone graft infection after delayed cranioplasty.

Authors:  A Matsuno; H Tanaka; H Iwamuro; S Takanashi; S Miyawaki; M Nakashima; H Nakaguchi; T Nagashima
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2006-02-09       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  Reconstruction of growing skull fracture with in situ galeal graft duraplasty and porous polyethylene sheet.

Authors:  Bashar Abuzayed; Saffet Tuzgen; Bulent Canbaz; Odhan Yuksel; Banu Tutunculer; Galip Zihni Sanus
Journal:  J Craniofac Surg       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.046

10.  "Single-step" resection and cranio-orbital reconstruction for spheno-orbital metastasis with custom made implant. A case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Vincenzo Antonelli; Giuseppe Maimone; Marcello D'Andrea; Alessia Tomassini; Massimo Bassi; Luigino Tosatto
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2021-03-11
View more
  3 in total

1.  Development of a new critical size defect model in the paranasal sinus and first approach for defect reconstruction-An in vivo maxillary bone defect study in sheep.

Authors:  R Rothweiler; S Kuhn; T Stark; S Heinemann; A Hoess; M A Fuessinger; L S Brandenburg; R Roelz; M C Metzger; U Hubbe
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 4.727

2.  Clinical Applications of Poly-Methyl-Methacrylate in Neurosurgery: The In Vivo Cranial Bone Reconstruction.

Authors:  Tomaz Velnar; Roman Bosnjak; Lidija Gradisnik
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2022-09-19

Review 3.  A Narrative Review of Cell-Based Approaches for Cranial Bone Regeneration.

Authors:  Maria I Falguera Uceda; Silvia Sánchez-Casanova; Clara Escudero-Duch; Nuria Vilaboa
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 6.321

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.