12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Initial Dead Space and Multiplicity of Bone Flap as Strong Risk Factors for Bone Flap Resorption after Cranioplasty for Traumatic Brain Injury

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Bone flap resorption (BFR) is a complication of cranioplasty (CP) that increases the risk of brain damage and can cause cosmetic defects. In this study, the risk factors for BFR were examined to improve the prognosis of patients after CP for traumatic brain injury (TBI).

          Methods

          This study was conducted in 80 patients with TBI who underwent decompressive craniectomy and CP with an autologous bone graft between August 2006 and August 2017. BFR was defined as a >0.1 ratio of the difference between the initial bone flap area and the last bone flap area to the craniectomy size and a <0.5 ratio of the last bone flap thickness to the bone thickness of the contralateral region on computed tomography scans and plain skull radiographs. The patients were divided into the BFR and non-BFR groups, and medical data were compared between the two groups.

          Results

          Among the 80 patients, 22 (27.5%) were diagnosed as having BFR after CP. The earliest cases of BFR occurred at 57 days after CP, and the latest BFR cases occurred at 3,677 days after CP. Using multivariate logistic regression analyses, the initial dead space size (odds ratio [OR], 1.002; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.001–1.004; p=0.006) and multiplicity of the bone flap (OR, 3.058; 95% CI, 1.021–9.164; p=0.046) were found to be risk factors for BFR.

          Conclusion

          The risk factors for BFR in this study were the initial dead space size and multiplicity of the bone flap.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Osteoinduction, osteoconduction and osseointegration.

          Osteoinduction is the process by which osteogenesis is induced. It is a phenomenon regularly seen in any type of bone healing process. Osteoinduction implies the recruitment of immature cells and the stimulation of these cells to develop into preosteoblasts. In a bone healing situation such as a fracture, the majority of bone healing is dependent on osteoinduction. Osteoconduction means that bone grows on a surface. This phenomenon is regularly seen in the case of bone implants. Implant materials of low biocompatibility such as copper, silver and bone cement shows little or no osteoconduction. Osseointegration is the stable anchorage of an implant achieved by direct bone-to-implant contact. In craniofacial implantology, this mode of anchorage is the only one for which high success rates have been reported. Osseointegration is possible in other parts of the body, but its importance for the anchorage of major arthroplasties is under debate. Ingrowth of bone in a porous-coated prosthesis may or may not represent osseointegration.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

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

            Decompressive craniectomy is a potentially life-saving procedure used in the treatment of medically refractory intracranial hypertension, most commonly in the setting of trauma or cerebral infarction. Once performed, surviving patients are obligated to undergo a second procedure for cranial reconstruction. The complications following cranial reconstruction are not well described in the literature and may very well be underreported. A review of the complications would suggest measures to improve the care of these patients. A retrospective chart review was undertaken of all patients who had undergone cranioplasty during a 7-year period. Demographic data, indications for craniectomy, as well as preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters following cranioplasty, were recorded. Perioperative and postoperative complications were also recorded. Patients were classified as having no complications, any complications, and complications requiring reoperation. The groups were compared to identify risk factors predictive of poor outcomes. The authors identified 62 patients who had undergone cranioplasty. The immediate postoperative complication rate was 34%. Of these, 46 patients did not require reoperation and 16 did. Of those requiring reoperation, 7 were due to infection, 2 from wound breakdown, 2 from intracranial hemorrhage, 3 from bone resorption, and 1 from a sunken cranioplasty, and 1 patient's cranioplasty procedure was prematurely ended due to intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia. The only factor statistically associated with need for reoperation was the presence of a bifrontal cranial defect (bifrontal: 8 [67%] of 12, requiring reoperation; unilateral: 8 [16%] of 49 requiring reoperation; p < 0.01) Cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy is associated with a high complication rate. Patients undergoing a bifrontal craniectomy are at significantly increased risk for postcranioplasty complications, including the need for reoperation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis.

              Cranioplasty, one of the oldest surgical procedures used to repair cranial defects, has undergone many revolutions over time to find the ideal material to improve patient prognosis. Cranioplasty offers cosmetic and protective benefits for patients with cranial defects. The first primitive cranioplasty procedures date back to 7000 bc and used metal and gourds to repair cranial defects. Cranioplasty was first documented by Fallopius who described repair using gold plates; the first bone graft was documented by van Meekeren. The first significant improvement for this procedure began with experimentation involving bone grafts in the late 19th century as a more natural approach for repairing cranial defects. The next impetus for advancement came because of wartime injuries incurred during World Wars I and II and involved experimentation with synthetic materials to counter the common complications associated with bone grafts. Methyl methacrylate, hydroxyapatite, ceramics, and polyetheretherketone implants among other materials have since been researched and used. Research now has shifted toward molecular biology to improve the ability of the patient to regenerate bone using bone growth factors. This paper reviews the evolution of materials used over time in addition to the various advantages and pitfalls associated with each change. It is important for neurosurgeons to be mindful of how these techniques have evolved in order to gain a better understanding of this procedure and how it has been adapted.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Korean J Neurotrauma
                Korean J Neurotrauma
                KJN
                Korean Journal of Neurotrauma
                Korean Neurotraumatology Society
                2234-8999
                2288-2243
                October 2018
                31 October 2018
                : 14
                : 2
                : 105-111
                Affiliations
                Department of Neurosurgery, Hallym University Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
                Author notes
                Address for correspondence: Jong-Il Choi. Department of Neurosurgery, Hallym University Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, 1 Singil-ro, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul 07441, Korea. Tel: +82-2-829-5179, Fax: +82-2-829-0219, thlthd@ 123456korea.ac.kr
                Article
                10.13004/kjnt.2018.14.2.105
                6218344
                30402427
                57bdad45-c9cd-4e03-8688-babe718bceeb
                Copyright © 2018 Korean Neurotraumatology Society

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 02 July 2018
                : 07 August 2018
                : 13 August 2018
                Categories
                Clinical Article

                bone resorption,brain injuries,craniotomy,transplantation

                Comments

                Comment on this article