Modern materials for the reconstruction of the cranial vault bones

Introduction. The need for cranioplasty occurs after the removal of the bony structures of the cranial vault. Craniotomy can be performed both in emergency as in case of increased intracranial pressure, and as a planned operation in the treatment of neoplasms or abscesses. A long-lasting presence of an extensive bone defect is the cause of the "trephined skull" syndrome development. Currently, cranioplasty is performed with materials of synthetic or natural origin. Synthetic materials include hydroxyapatite, tricalcium phosphate, polymethyl methacrylate. The natural materials include the auto-, allo- and xenografts. The main disadvantage of bone autografts is their rapid lysis. The most promising solution to this problem may include a lyophilization method with transplant saturation with growth factors, the source of which can be autoplasma rich in platelets. Of particular relevance is the development of methods for the preparation and preservation of an autograft, its modification in order to increase osteoreparative properties, which will bring the cranioplasty method with natural transplants to a whole new level.

The purpose of research. Combine relevant data and the results of a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of existing bone-plastic materials.

1. Andrabi S, Sarmast AH, Kirmani AR, Bhat AR. Cranioplasty: Indications, procedures, and outcome – An institutional experience. Surg Neurol Int. 2017;8(1):91. PMID: 28607825 https://doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_45_17

2. Aydin S, Kucukyuruk B, Abuzayed B, Aydin S, Sanus GZ. Cranioplasty: Review of materials and techniques. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2011;2(2):162–167. PMID: 21897681 https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-3147.83584

3. Ang CY, Loh DS, Chaw HW, Chin PL. Simple Novel Bone Bank Storage: The Singapore General Hospital Experience. Biopreserv Biobank. 2012;10(6):526–528. PMID: 24845139 https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2012.0048

4. Still M, Kane A, Roux A, Zanello M, Dezamis E, Parraga E, et al. Independent Factors Affecting Postoperative Complication Rates After Custom-Made Porous Hydroxyapatite Cranioplasty: A Single- Center Review of 109 Cases. World Neurosurg. 2018;114:e1232–e1244. PMID: 29625304 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.03.181

5. van de Vijfeijken SECM, Münker TJAG, Spijker R, Spijker R, Karssemakers LHE, Vandertop WP, et al. Autologous bone is inferior to alloplastic cranioplasties Safety of autograft and allograft materials for cranioplasties, a systematic review. World Neurosurg. 2018;117:443–452.e8. PMID: 29879511 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.05.193

6. Zanotti B, Zingaretti N, Verlicchi A, Robiony M, Alfieri A, Parodi PC. Cranioplasty: Review of Materials. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(8):2061–2072. PMID: 28005754 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003025

7. Muñoz XM, Bonardi JP, Silva LF, Reis EN, Pires WR, Fabris AL, et al. Cranioplasty With Poly-Methyl Methacrylate Resin. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28(1):294–295. PMID: 27906847 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003226

8. Khader BA, Towler MR. Materials and techniques used in cranioplasty fixation: A review. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;66:315–322. PMID: 27207068 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.04.101

9. Pikis S, Goldstein J, Spektor S. Potential neurotoxic effects of polymethylmethacrylate during cranioplasty. J Clin Neurosci. 2015;22(1):139–143. PMID: 25085727 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2014.06.006

10. Tian Y, Lu T, He F, Xu Y, Shi H, Shi X, et al. β-tricalcium phosphate composite ceramics with high compressive strength, enhanced osteogenesis and inhibited osteoclastic activities. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2018;167:318–327. PMID: 29679808 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfb.2018.04.028

11. Chen TM, Tsai JC, Burnouf T. Cranioplasty Using Osteoconductive Scaffold and Platelet Glue. J Trauma. 2008;65(6):1321–1327. PMID: 19077621 https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181574edf

12. Karamese M, Toksoz MR, Selimoglu MN, Akdağ O, Toy H, Tosun Z. Comparison of Bone Dust With Other Types of Bone Grafts for Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2014;25(4):1155–1158. PMID: 25006886 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000000765

13. Tseng CL, Chang GW, Ou KL, Chou WT, Wu TH, et al. Cranioplasty Using a Novel Osteoconductive Scaffold and Platelet Gel. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(Suppl 1):S125–S129. PMID: 26808739 https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000000696

14. Feroze RA, Agarwal N, Sekula RF. Utility of Calcium Phosphate Cement Cranioplasty following Supraorbital Approach for Tumor Resection. Int J Neurosci. 2018;128(12):1199–1203 PMID: 29952679 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2018.1492573

15. Feroze AH, Walmsley GG, Choudhri O, Lorenz HP, Grant GA, Edwards MS. Evolution of cranioplasty techniques in neurosurgery: historical review, pediatric considerations, and current trends. J Neurosurg. 2015;123(4):1098–1107. PMID: 25699411 https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.11.JNS14622

16. Sun Y, Hu Y, Yuan Q, Yu J, Wu X, Du Z, et al. Association between metal hypersensitivity and implant failure in patients who underwent titanium cranioplasty. J Neurosurg. 2018 Jul 1:1–7. PMID: 29979123 https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.1.JNS171804 [Epub ahead of print].

17. Shah AM, Jung H, Skirboll S. Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis. Neurosurg Focus. 2014;36(4):E19. PMID: 24684331 https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.2.FOCUS13561

18. Missori P, Morselli C, Domenicucci M. Transplantation of autologous cranioplasty in Europe as part of bone organ. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2014;156(10): 2015–2016. PMID: 25160852 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2207-5

19. Plum AW, Tatum SA. A comparison between autograft alone, bone cement, and demineralized bone matrix in cranioplasty. Laryngoscope. 2015;125(6):1322–1327. PMID: 25641743 https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.25158

20. Sahoo NK, Tomar K, Thakral A, Rangan NM. Complications of Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(5):1344–1348. PMID: 29533253 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004478

21. Carson LV, Goodrich JT, Prestigiacomo CJ. Introduction: History of craniotomy, cranioplasty, and perioperative care. Neurosurg Focus. 2014;36(4):Introduction. PMID: 24684341 https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.2.FOCUS1470

22. Beainy F, El Amm C, Abousleimane Y, Mapstone T, Beidas O, Workman M. Biomechanical Effects of Cranioplasty for Defects Using Autogenous Calvarial Bone. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23(2):e152–e155. PMID: 22446454 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e31824cdc0d

23. Mrad MA, Murrad K, Antonyshyn O. Analyzing the Cost of Autogenous Cranioplasty Versus Custom-Made Patient-Specific Alloplastic Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;28(5):1260–1263. PMID: 28582300 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003708

24. Morton RP, Abecassis IJ, Hanson JF, Barber J, Nerva JD, Emerson SN, et al. Predictors of infection after 754 cranioplasty operations and the value of intraoperative cultures for cryopreserved bone flaps. J Neurosurg. 2016;125(3):766–770. PMID: 26771856 https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.8.JNS151390

25. Chan DYC, Mok YT, Lam PK, Tong CSW, Ng SCP, Sun TFD, et al. Cryostored autologous skull bone for cranioplasty? A study on cranial bone flaps’ viability and microbial contamination after deep-frozen storage at –80°C. J Clin Neurosci. 2017;42:81–83. PMID: 28431953 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.04.016

26. Jin S, Kim SD, Ha SK, Lim DJ, Lee H, You HJ. Analysis of the factors affecting surgical site infection and bone flap resorption after cranioplasty with autologous cryopreserved bone: the importance of temporalis muscle preservation. Turk Neurosurg. 2018;28(6):882–888. PMID: 29165749 https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.21333-17.2

27. Anto D, Manjooran RP, Aravindakshan R, Lakshman K, Morris R. Cranioplasty using autoclaved autologous skull bone flaps preserved at ambient temperature. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2017;8(4):595–600. PMID: 29204021 https://doi.org/10.4103/jnrp.jnrp_270_17

28. Mracek J, Hommerova J, Mork J, Richtr P, Priban V. Complications of cranioplasty using a bone flap sterilised by autoclaving following decompressive craniectomy. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015;157(3):501–506. PMID: 25588749 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2333-0

29. Wui S-H, Kim KM, Ryu YJ, Kim I, Lee SJ, Kim J, et al. The Autoclaving of Autologous Bone is a Risk Factor for Surgical Site Infection After Cranioplasty. World Neurosurg. 2016;91:43–49. PMID: 27032525 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.03.066

30. Zhang J, Peng F, Liu Z, Luan J, Liu X, Fei C, et al. Cranioplasty with autogenous bone flaps cryopreserved in povidone iodine: a long-term follow-up study. J Neurosurg. 2017;127(6):1449–1456. PMID: 28186447 https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.8.JNS16204

31. Corliss B, Gooldy T, Vaziri S, Kubilis P, Murad G, Fargen K. Complications After In Vivo and Ex Vivo Autologous Bone Flap Storage for Cranioplasty: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature. World Neurosurg. 2016;96:510–515. PMID: 27647038 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.025

32. Alves Junior AC, Hamamoto Filho PT, Gonçalves MP, Palhares Neto AA, Zanini MA. Cranioplasty: An Institutional Experience. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(6):1402–1405. PMID: 29554074 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004512

33. Nguyen H, Doan N, Wolfla C, Pollock G. Fenestration of bone flap during interval autologous cranioplasty. Surg Neurol Int. 2015;6:190. PMID: 26759735 https://doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.172535

34. Sun J, Chen H, Wang J. Cranioplasty With Mandibular Outer Cortex Bone Grafts. J Craniofac Surg. 2017;29(1):153–155. PMID: 29194252 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004176

35. Kim JH, Kim JH, Kwon TH, Chong K, Hwang SY, Yoon WK. Aseptic Bone Flap Resorption after Cranioplasty with Autologous Bone: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Implications. World Neurosurg. 2018;115:e111–e118. PMID: 29626687 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.03.197

36. Lemée J-M, Petit D, Splingard M, Menei P. Autologous bone flap versus hydroxyapatite prosthesis in first intention in secondary cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: A French medico-economical study. Neurochirurgie. 2013;59(2):60–63. PMID: 23414773 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuchi.2012.10.138

37. Wolff A, Santiago GF, Belzberg M, Huggins C, Lim M, Weingart J, et al. Adult Cranioplasty Reconstruction With Customized Cranial Implants. J Craniofac Surg. 2018;29(4):887–894. PMID: 29489570 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004385

38. Gilardino MS, Karunanayake M, Al-Humsi T, Izadpanah A, Al-Ajmi H, Marcoux J, et al. A Comparison and Cost Analysis of Cranioplasty Techniques. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(1):113–117. PMID:25534061 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001305

39. Honeybul S, Morrison DA, Ho KM, Lind CRP, Geelhoed E. A randomised controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty: long-term follow-up. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018;160(5):885–891. PMID: 29546554 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-018-3514-z

40. Malcolm JG, Mahmooth Z, Rindler RS, Allen JW, Grossberg JA, Pradilla G, et al. Autologous Cranioplasty is Associated with Increased Reoperation Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2018;116:60–68. PMID: 29753896 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.05.009

41. Korhonen TK, Salokorpi N, Niinimäki J, Serlo W, Lehenkari P, Tetri S. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of bone flap resorption in patients undergoing cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy. J Neurosurg. 2018;130(1):312–321. PMID: 29473777 https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.JNS171857

42. Korhonen TK, Tetri S, Huttunen J, Lindgren A, Piitulainen JM, Serlo W, et al. Predictors of primary autograft cranioplasty survival and resorption after craniectomy. J Neurosurg. May 1: 1–8. PMID: 29749908 https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.12.JNS172013 [Epub ahead of print].

43. Krishnan P, Kartikueyan R, Roychowdhury S. Near-total bone flap resorption following autologous bone cranioplasty in a child. Pediatr Neurosurg. 2016;51(2):109–110. PMID: 26674532 https://doi.org/10.1159/000441681

44. LEÃO RS, Maior JRS, Lemos CAA, Vasconcelos BCDE, Montes MAJR, Pellizzer EP, et al. Complications with PMMA compared with other materials used in cranioplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz Oral Res. 2018;32:e31. PMID: 29898018 https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018. vol32.0031

45. Fu KJ, Barr RM, Kerr ML, Shah MN, Fletcher SA, Sandberg DI, et al. An Outcomes Comparison Between Autologous and Alloplastic Cranioplasty in the Pediatric Population. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(3):593–597. PMID: 27035597 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002491

46. Mohamad SA, Mohd Haspani MS, Idris B. There are No Differences between Factors Determining Graft infection in Autologous Bone Flap Replacement and Acrylic Cranioplasty: A Prospective Observational Study at Hospital Kuala Lumpur. Malaysian J Med Sci. 2016;23(5):83–90. PMID: 27904429 https://doi.org/10.21315/mjms2016.23.5.11

47. Lindner D, Schlothofer-Schumann K, Kern BC, Marx O, Müns A, Meixensberger J. Cranioplasty using custommade hydroxyapatite versus titanium: a randomized clinical trial. J Neurosurg. 2017;126(1):175–183. PMID: 26918471 https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.10.JNS151245

48. Moles A, Heudes PM, Amelot A, Cristini J, Salaud C, Roualdes V, et al. Long-Term Follow-Up Comparative Study of Hydroxyapatite and Autologous Cranioplasties: Complications, Cosmetic Results, Osseointegration. World Neurosurg. 2018;111:e395–e402. PMID: 29277595 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.082

49. Lethaus B, Bloebaum M, Koper D, Poort-Ter Laak M, Kessler P. Interval cranioplasty with patient-specific implants and autogenous bone grafts – Success and cost analysis. J Cranio- Maxillofacial Surg. 2014;42(8):1948–1951. PMID: 25443869 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.08.006

50. Thesleff T, Lehtimäki K, Niskakangas T, Huovinen S, Mannerström B, Miettinen S, et al. Cranioplasty with Adipose-Derived Stem Cells, Beta-Tri calcium Phosphate Granules and Supporting Mesh: Six-Year Clinical Follow- Up Results. Stem Cells Transl Med. 2017;6(7):1576–1582. PMID: 28504874 https://doi.org/10.1002/sctm.16-0410

51. Piitulainen JM, Kauko T, Aitasalo KM, Vuorinen V, Vallittu PK, Posti JP. Outcomes of Cranioplasty with Synthetic Materials and Autologous Bone Grafts. World Neurosurg. 2015;83(5):708–714. PMID: 25681593 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.01.014

52. Morales-Gómez JA, Garcia-Estrada E, Leos-Bortoni JE, Delgado-Brito M, Flores-Huerta LE, De La Cruz- Arriaga AA, et al. Cranioplasty with a low-cost customized polymethylmethacrylate implant using a desktop 3D printer. J Neurosurg. 2018 Jun 1:1–7. PMID: 29905512 https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.12.JNS172574 [Epub ahead of print].

53. Макаров М.С., Пономарев И.Н. Роль богатой тромбоцитами плазмы в репарации дефектов костной ткани. Хирургия. Журнал им. Н.И. Пирогова. 2015;(10):94-99. Makarov MS, Ponomarev IN. Platelet rich plasma in bones defects regeneration. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery = Khirurgiya. Zhurnal imeni N.I. Pirogova. 2015;(10):94–99. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia20151094-99