Computer-guided cranioplasty using ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene patient-specific implants: a case series
Tóm tắt
Cranioplasty is the surgical correction of a cranial defect. Three-dimensional software designs have allowed patient-specific single-step cranial reconstruction for neuroprotection and cosmesis. Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene for partial or total bone replacement has been recently introduced as a promising material for cranioplasty. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the complications and esthetic results concerning the use of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene patient-specific implants in craniectomy patients. We report a series of nine patients with cranial defects from a previous craniectomy, or patients eligible for simultaneous craniectomy and cranioplasty via computer designed ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene patient-specific implants. We have analyzed the complications and cosmetic outcomes over a course of six months. None of the cases developed infection, extra/subdural hematoma, cerebrospinal fluid leak, or implant failure. Three cases had postoperative sequalae: The first patient had mild postoperative seroma which subsided after medical therapy and compression, the second showed wound breakdown due to tumor metastasis and recurrence but did not necessitate implant removal, while the third sequela was a subgaleal hematoma which was aspirated, and the patient healed uneventfully afterward. Esthetic results were highly satisfactory in 75% of the patients (good patient acceptance without touch-ups). Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene is in all respects suitable for primary and secondary cranioplasty, combined with computer-aided manufacturing–computer-aided design techniques, excellent esthetic and functional results were achieved. However, proper preoperative planning is important, and we recommend further prospective studies with larger number of patients followed up for longer periods for better assessment.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Shah AM, Jung H, Skirboll S. Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis. Neurosurg Focus. 2014;36(4):E19.
Prolo DJ. Cranial defect & cranioplasty. Clin Neurosurg. 1996;275:2783–95.
Abd Al Ratha G, Hamandi Y. The efficacy of monomeric acrylic in cranioplasty surgery five-year follow-up. Iraqi Natl J Med. 2021;3(2):53–65.
Goldstein JA, Paliga JT, Bartlett SP. Cranioplasty: indications and advances. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;21(4):400–9.
Mahapure KS, Murray DJ. The historical timeline of cranioplasty. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021;74(3):632–3.
Hussain M, et al. Ultra-high-molecular-weight-polyethylene (UHMWPE) as a promising polymer material for biomedical applications: a concise review. Polymers (Basel). 2020;12(2):323.
Macuvele DLP, et al. Advances in ultra high molecular weight polyethylene/hydroxyapatite composites for biomedical applications: a brief review. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2017;76:1248–62.
Oishi T, et al. Cosmetic and neuroprotective placement of custom-made ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene cranial plate (SKULPIO) in single-step surgery: technical note and case report. World Neurosurg. 2019;130:187–91.
Maksimkin AV, et al. Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene/titanium-hybrid implant for bone-defect replacement. Materials (Basel). 2020;13(13):3010.
Sobieraj MC, Rimnac CM. Ultra high molecular weight polyethylene: mechanics, morphology, and clinical behavior. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2009;2(5):433–43.
Brach Del Prever EM, et al. UHMWPE for arthroplasty: past or future? J Orthop Traumatol. 2009;10(1):1–8.
Jonásová L, et al. Biomimetic apatite formation on chemically treated titanium. Biomaterials. 2004;25(7–8):1187–94.
Anderson BC, et al. Al–Cu–Fe quasicrystal/ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene composites as biomaterials for acetabular cup prosthetics. Biomaterials. 2002;23(8):1761–8.
van de Vijfeijken S, et al. Factors related to failure of autologous cranial reconstructions after decompressive craniectomy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47(9):1420–5.
Aydin S, et al. Cranioplasty: review of materials and techniques. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2011;2(2):162–7.
Alonso-Rodriguez E, et al. Polyetheretherketone custom-made implants for craniofacial defects: report of 14 cases and review of the literature. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(7):1232–8.
Jonkergouw J, et al. Outcome in patient-specific PEEK cranioplasty: a two-center cohort study of 40 implants. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(9):1266–72.
Punchak M, et al. Outcomes following polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cranioplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Neurosci. 2017;41:30–5.
Murnan EJ, Christensen BJ. Risk factors for postoperative inflammatory complications after maxillofacial reconstruction using polyether-ether-ketone implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;79(3):696.e1-696.e7.
Brandicourt P, et al. Reconstruction of cranial vault defect with polyetheretherketone implants. World Neurosurg. 2017;105:783–9.
Jalbert F, et al. One-step primary reconstruction for complex craniofacial resection with PEEK custom-made implants. J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2014;42(2):141–8.
Vitanovics D, et al. Tailored cranioplasty using CAD–CAM technology. Ideggyogy Sz. 2014;67(11–12):390–6.
Kobayashi K, et al. Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) wing method for strong cranioplasty. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2021;61(9):549–56.
Wiggins A, et al. Cranioplasty with custom-made titanium plates-14 years experience. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(2):248–56.