Review of Cranioplasty after Decompressive Craniectomy

Large retrospective study of artificial dura substitute in patients with traumatic brain injury undergo decompressive craniectomy

Background

Decompressive craniectomy is widely used for treating patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Usually patients have dura mater defect due to surgery or injury itself. The defective area may left open or repaired by artificial dura substitutes. A variety of artificial dura substitutes have been used for this purpose.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate bovine-derived pericardium membrane as artificial dural material for patients with decompressive craniectomy.

Methods

Totally 387 patients with severe TBI in our hospital were included in this study. Among them, 192 patients were treated with standard decompressive craniectomy without dura repair (control group). One hundred and ninety-five TBI patients were treated with dura repair by artificial dura materials (ADM). Nonlyophilized bovine pericardium membranes were used as artificial dura material. The postoperative complications were compared in both groups, including infection, seizure, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage.

Results

Patients in control group have higher complication rates than patients in ADM group, including subcutaneous hematoma (13.02% in control vs. 4.01% in ADM group, p = .004), infection (12.5% in control vs. 5.64% in ADM group, p = .021), CSF leakage (13.02% in control vs. 5.13% in ADM group, p = .012), and seizure (10.42% in control vs. 3.08% in ADM group, p = .007). Patients in ADM group are only associated with higher incidence of foreign body reaction (6 of 195 patients in ADM vs. none from control group).

Conclusion

Bovine-derived pericardium membranes are successfully used as artificial dural substitutes for decompressive craniectomy. Patients with ADM have better clinical outcome than control group.

Bone substitutes: a review of their characteristics, clinical use, and perspectives for large bone defects management

Bone replacement might have been practiced for centuries with various materials of natural origin, but had rarely met success until the late 19th century. Nowadays, many different bone substitutes can be used. They can be either derived from biological products such as demineralized bone matrix, platelet-rich plasma, hydroxyapatite, adjunction of growth factors (like bone morphogenetic protein) or synthetic such as calcium sulfate, tri-calcium phosphate ceramics, bioactive glasses, or polymer-based substitutes. All these substitutes are not suitable for every clinical use, and they have to be chosen selectively depending on their purpose. Thus, this review aims to highlight the principal characteristics of the most commonly used bone substitutes and to give some directions concerning their clinical use, as spine fusion, open-wedge tibial osteotomy, long bone fracture, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or periodontal treatments. However, the main limitations to bone substitutes use remain the management of large defects and the lack of vascularization in their central part, which is likely to appear following their utilization. In the field of bone tissue engineering, developing porous synthetic substitutes able to support a faster and a wider vascularization within their structure seems to be a promising way of research.

Rationale Behind the Use of Double-Layer Polypropylene Patch (G-patch) Dural Substitute During Decompressive Craniectomy as an Adhesion Preventive Material for Subsequent Cranioplasty with Special Reference to Flap Elevation Time

OBJECTIVE

Dural substitutes are used in decompressive craniectomy (DC) to prevent adhesions during subsequent cranioplasty. Current literature attributes them to reduced blood loss and reduction in operative time of cranioplasty. The use of double-layer substitute has rarely been documented. We studied the use of double-layer G-patch as a dural substitute in DC and evaluated its outcome during subsequent cranioplasty with special focus on flap elevation time and blood loss during cranioplasty.

METHODS

We performed emergency frontotemporoparietal decompressive craniectomy using a double layer of G-patch as dural substitute. Subsequent cranioplasty was done in these 35 patients. The development of adhesion formation between the tissue layers, amount of blood loss, and flap elevation time were recorded.

RESULTS

During the cranioplasty, a clear and smooth plane of dissection was found between the 2 layers of G-patch in all cases. Average flap elevation time was 21.8 minutes, and average time taken for cranioplasty was 124.12 minutes. Average blood loss was 83 mL. None of the patients required re-exploration for infection of bone flap or postoperative bleed.

CONCLUSIONS

While evaluating the use of dural substitute during DC as an adhesion preventive material for subsequent cranioplasty, flap elevation time and blood loss should be taken into account rather than operative time. Double-layer G-patch during DC facilitates subsequent cranioplasty by preventing adhesions between the layers, resulting in easier dissection and reduced blood loss.