Page 27 - Clinical relevance of current materials for cranial implants

27. de León, Á. R. M.-P. et al. Cranioplasty with a low-cost customized polymethylmethacrylate implant using a desktop 3D printer. J. Neurosurg. 1–7 (2018).
28. Mostafa, N. Y. & Brown, P. W. Computer simulation of stoichiometric hydroxyapatite: Structure and substitutions. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 68, 431–437 (2007).
29. Wei, G. & Ma, P. X. Structure and properties of nano-hydroxyapatite/polymer composite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Biomaterials 25, 4749–4757 (2004).
30. Katthagen, B.-D. Bone Regeneration with Bone Substitutes An Animal Study. (1987).
31. D.B., M. & P.N., M. Biomechanical analysis of hydroxyapatite cement cranioplasty. J. Craniofac. Surg. 15, 415–
423 (2004).
32. Xu, H. H. K., Carey, L. E., Simon, C. G., Takagi, S. & Chow, L. C. Premixed calcium phosphate cements: Synthesis,
physical properties, and cell cytotoxicity. Dent. Mater. 23, 433–441 (2007).
33. Gosain, A. K. Hydroxyapatite cement paste cranioplasty for the treatment of temporal hollowing after cranial
vault remodeling in a growing child. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 8, 506–511 (1997).
34. Kurtz, S. M. in PEEK Biomaterials Handbook 1–7 (Elsevier, 2012).
35. Hanasono, M. M., Goel, N. & DeMonte, F. Calvarial reconstruction with polyetheretherketone implants. Ann. Plast. Surg. 62, 653–655 (2009).
36. Lethaus, B. et al. Patient-specific implants compared with stored bone grafts for patients with interval cranioplasty. J. Craniofac. Surg. 25, 206–209 (2014).
37. Katzer, A., Marquardt, H., Westendorf, J., Wening, J. V. & Von Foerster, G. Polyetheretherketone - Cytotoxicity and mutagenicity in vitro. Biomaterials 23, 1749–1759 (2002).
38. Lethaus, B. et al. A treatment algorithm for patients with large skull bone defects and first results. J. Cranio- Maxillo-Facial Surg. 39, 435–440 (2011).
39. van de Vijfeijken, S. E. C. M., Schreurs, R., Dubois, L., Becking, A. G. & on behalf of the CranioSafe Group. The use of cranial resection templates with 3D virtual planning and PEEK patient-specific implants: A 3 year follow-up. J. Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surg. (2018).
General introduction and outline of this thesis
26. van de Vijfeijken, S. E. C. M. et al. Autologous bone is inferior to alloplastic cranioplasties Safety of autograft 1 and allograft materials for cranioplasties, a systematic review. World Neurosurg. (2018).
25