Page 26 - Clinical relevance of current materials for cranial implants

24
Chapter 1
References
1. Vahedi, K. et al. Early decompressive surgery in malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery: a pooled analysis of three randomised controlled trials. Lancet Neurol. 6, 215–222 (2007).
2. Honeybul, S. & Ho, K. M. Decompressive Craniectomy - A narrative review and discussion. Aust. Crit. Care 27, 85–91 (2014).
3. Yang, M. H. et al. Decompressive hemicraniectomy in patients with malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgeon 13, 230–240 (2015).
4. Hutchinson, P. J. et al. Trial of Decompressive Craniectomy for Traumatic Intracranial Hypertension. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 1119–1130 (2016).
5. Malcolm, J. G. et al. Complications following cranioplasty and relationship to timing: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Clin. Neurosci. 33, 39–51 (2016).
6. O’Keeffe, A. B., Lawrence, T. & Bojanic, S. Oxford craniotomy infections database: A cost analysis of craniotomy infection. Br. J. Neurosurg. 26, 265–269 (2012).
7. Schoekler, B. & Trummer, M. Prediction parameters of bone flap resorption following cranioplasty with autologous bone. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 120, 64–67 (2014).
8. Yadla, S. et al. Effect of early surgery, material, and method of flap preservation on cranioplasty infections: A systematic review. Neurosurgery 68, 1124–1130 (2011).
9. Ernst, G., Qeadan, F. & Carlson, A. P. Subcutaneous bone flap storage after emergency craniectomy: cost- effectiveness and rate of resorption. J. Neurosurg. 129, 1604–1610 (2018).
10. Cheng, C. H., Lee, H. C., Chen, C. C., Cho, D. Y. & Lin, H. L. Cryopreservation versus subcutaneous preservation of autologous bone flaps for Cranioplasty: Comparison of the surgical site infection and bone resorption rates. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 124, 85–89 (2014).
11. Movassaghi, K. et al. Cranioplasty with subcutaneously preserved autologous bone grafts. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 117, 202–206 (2006).
12. Wolff, A. et al. Adult cranioplasty reconstruction with customized cranial implants: Preferred technique, timing, and biomaterials. J. Craniofac. Surg. 29, 887–894 (2018).
13. Klinger, D. R. et al. Autologous and acrylic cranioplasty: A review of 10 years and 258 cases. World Neurosurg. 82, E525–E530 (2014).
14. Zanotti, B. et al. Cranioplasty: Review of Materials. J. Craniofac. Surg. 27, 2061–2072 (2016).
15. Sanan, Abhay MD; Haines, S. J. M. Repairing Holes in the Head: A History of Cranioplasty. Neurosurgery 40,
588–603 (1997).
16. Shah, A. M., Jung, H. & Skirboll, S. Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis. Neurosurg. Focus 36, E19 (2014).
17. Abuzayed, B., Aydin, S., Sanus, G., Aydin, S. & Kucukyuruk, B. Cranioplasty: Review of materials and techniques. J. Neurosci. Rural Pract. 2, 162 (2011).
18. Feroze, A. H. et al. Evolution of cranioplasty techniques in neurosurgery: historical review, pediatric considerations, and current trends. J. Neurosurg. 123, 1098–1107 (2015).
19. Grant, G. A. et al. Failure of autologous bone—assisted cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy in children and adolescents. J. Neurosurg. Pediatr. 100, 163–168 (2004).
20. van de Vijfeijken, S. E. C. M. et al. Autologous bone is inferior to alloplastic cranioplasties Safety of autograft and allograft materials for cranioplasties, a systematic review. World Neurosurg. (2018).
21. Kwiecien, G. J. et al. Long-term Outcomes of Cranioplasty: Titanium Mesh Is Not a Long-term Solution in High-risk Patients. Ann. Plast. Surg. 81, 416–422 (2018).
22. Nottrott, M. Acrylic bone cements. Acta Orthop. 81, 1–27 (2010).
23. Arora, M. Polymethylmethacrylate bone cements and additives: A review of the literature. World J. Orthop. 4,
67 (2013).
24. Breusch, S. J. M. H. The Well-Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty: Theory and Practice. (2005).
25. Harris, D. A. et al. History of synthetic materials in alloplastic cranioplasty. Neurosurg. Focus 36, E20 (2014).