Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.

OBJECTIVE:One of the common complications occurring after cranioplasty (CP) is aseptic bone-flap resorption (ABFR). Reoperation necessary because of the development of ABFR can lead to unfavorable complications during subsequent surgery using a synthetic skull implant, and also necessarily leads to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ali Rashidi, I Erol Sandalcioglu, Michael Luchtmann
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2020-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228009
id doaj-a213f39a61354b49a1f9fff5819863b4
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a213f39a61354b49a1f9fff5819863b42021-03-03T21:24:43ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-01151e022800910.1371/journal.pone.0228009Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.Ali RashidiI Erol SandalciogluMichael LuchtmannOBJECTIVE:One of the common complications occurring after cranioplasty (CP) is aseptic bone-flap resorption (ABFR). Reoperation necessary because of the development of ABFR can lead to unfavorable complications during subsequent surgery using a synthetic skull implant, and also necessarily leads to higher costs. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors that may help to predict the development of ABFR. METHODS:In this study, 303 CP surgeries performed between 2002 and 2017 were examined retrospectively to identify factors predicting the occurrence of ABFR. A number of these factors (e.g., time lapse between decompressive craniectomy (DC) and CP, bone-flap size, specific laboratory signs, and the reason for the original DC) were analyzed as possibly influencing the risk of developing ABFR. RESULTS:ABFR of an autologous bone flap that subsequently required a CP with synthetic skull implants occurred in 10 of 303 patients (3.0%). CP timing and patients' Karnofsky Performance Scores (KPS) (p = 0.008; p = 0.012) were identified as significant factors with an impact on the development of ABRF. Age did not reveal a significant value, but statistical analysis shows a clear trend. The younger the age, the more likely it was that an ABFR would develop. CONCLUSION:The risk of ABFR lessens the longer the period of time elapsed between DC and CP. Age does not reveal a significant value, but statistical analysis shows that there is a clear trend.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228009
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ali Rashidi
I Erol Sandalcioglu
Michael Luchtmann
spellingShingle Ali Rashidi
I Erol Sandalcioglu
Michael Luchtmann
Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Ali Rashidi
I Erol Sandalcioglu
Michael Luchtmann
author_sort Ali Rashidi
title Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
title_short Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
title_full Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
title_fullStr Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
title_full_unstemmed Aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
title_sort aseptic bone-flap resorption after cranioplasty - incidence and risk factors.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2020-01-01
description OBJECTIVE:One of the common complications occurring after cranioplasty (CP) is aseptic bone-flap resorption (ABFR). Reoperation necessary because of the development of ABFR can lead to unfavorable complications during subsequent surgery using a synthetic skull implant, and also necessarily leads to higher costs. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors that may help to predict the development of ABFR. METHODS:In this study, 303 CP surgeries performed between 2002 and 2017 were examined retrospectively to identify factors predicting the occurrence of ABFR. A number of these factors (e.g., time lapse between decompressive craniectomy (DC) and CP, bone-flap size, specific laboratory signs, and the reason for the original DC) were analyzed as possibly influencing the risk of developing ABFR. RESULTS:ABFR of an autologous bone flap that subsequently required a CP with synthetic skull implants occurred in 10 of 303 patients (3.0%). CP timing and patients' Karnofsky Performance Scores (KPS) (p = 0.008; p = 0.012) were identified as significant factors with an impact on the development of ABRF. Age did not reveal a significant value, but statistical analysis shows a clear trend. The younger the age, the more likely it was that an ABFR would develop. CONCLUSION:The risk of ABFR lessens the longer the period of time elapsed between DC and CP. Age does not reveal a significant value, but statistical analysis shows that there is a clear trend.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228009
work_keys_str_mv AT alirashidi asepticboneflapresorptionaftercranioplastyincidenceandriskfactors
AT ierolsandalcioglu asepticboneflapresorptionaftercranioplastyincidenceandriskfactors
AT michaelluchtmann asepticboneflapresorptionaftercranioplastyincidenceandriskfactors
_version_ 1714817002090004480