Michelle K Oberoi, Sarah Mirzaie, Kelly X Huang, Rachel M Caprini, Vivian J Hu, Dillon Dejam, Shaokui Ge, Brendan J Cronin, Miles J Pfaff, Justine C Lee
{"title":"Complications and Failures of Autologous Heterotopic Cranial Bone versus Alloplastic Cranioplasties.","authors":"Michelle K Oberoi, Sarah Mirzaie, Kelly X Huang, Rachel M Caprini, Vivian J Hu, Dillon Dejam, Shaokui Ge, Brendan J Cronin, Miles J Pfaff, Justine C Lee","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fresh autologous cranial bone graft has traditionally been regarded as the ideal cranioplasty material; however, long-term comparisons of outcomes with modern alloplastic materials are absent in the literature. The authors evaluated complications and failures among cranioplasties performed with fresh, heterotopic, cranial bone graft versus 3 common alloplastic materials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Random-effects meta-analyses of logit-transformed proportions were performed on studies published between 1971 and 2021 to evaluate complications and failures of cranioplasties performed with fresh, autologous, heterotopic cranial bone; polyetheretherketone (PEEK); polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA); or titanium with a mean follow-up of 12 months or more. Generalized mixed model meta-regressions were performed to account for heterogeneity and to evaluate the contributions of moderators to outcomes variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1490 patients (mean age, 33.9 ± 10.8 years) were included. Pooled, all-cause complications were 6.2% for fresh, heterotopic, autologous cranial bone (95% CI, 2.1% to 17.0%; I2 = 55.0; P = 0.02), 18.5% for PEEK (95% CI, 14.0% to 24.0%; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.58), 26.1% for titanium (95% CI, 18.7% to 35.1%; I2 = 60.6%; P < 0.01), and 28.4% for PMMA (95% CI, 12.9% to 51.5%; I2 = 88.5%; P < 0.01). Pooled all-cause failures were 2.2% for fresh autologous cranial bone (95% CI, 0.4% to 10.6%; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.45), 6.3% for PEEK (95% CI, 3.2% to 12.3%; I2 = 15.5%; P = 0.31), 11.4% for titanium (95% CI, 6.7% to 18.8%; I2 = 60.8%; P < 0.01), and 12.7% for PMMA (95% CI, 6.9% to 22.0%; I2 = 64.8%; P < 0.01). Meta-regression models indicated that each alloplastic subtype significantly and independently predicted higher complications, whereas titanium and PMMA were significant predictors for all-cause failures compared with autologous bone. All 3 subtypes were predictive of higher cranioplasty failures secondary to infection compared with autologous bone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cranioplasties performed with fresh, autologous, heterotopic cranial bone grafts resulted in lower complication and failure rates compared with alloplastic materials.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"757e-772e"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10963343/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011093","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Fresh autologous cranial bone graft has traditionally been regarded as the ideal cranioplasty material; however, long-term comparisons of outcomes with modern alloplastic materials are absent in the literature. The authors evaluated complications and failures among cranioplasties performed with fresh, heterotopic, cranial bone graft versus 3 common alloplastic materials.
Methods: Random-effects meta-analyses of logit-transformed proportions were performed on studies published between 1971 and 2021 to evaluate complications and failures of cranioplasties performed with fresh, autologous, heterotopic cranial bone; polyetheretherketone (PEEK); polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA); or titanium with a mean follow-up of 12 months or more. Generalized mixed model meta-regressions were performed to account for heterogeneity and to evaluate the contributions of moderators to outcomes variables.
Results: A total of 1490 patients (mean age, 33.9 ± 10.8 years) were included. Pooled, all-cause complications were 6.2% for fresh, heterotopic, autologous cranial bone (95% CI, 2.1% to 17.0%; I2 = 55.0; P = 0.02), 18.5% for PEEK (95% CI, 14.0% to 24.0%; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.58), 26.1% for titanium (95% CI, 18.7% to 35.1%; I2 = 60.6%; P < 0.01), and 28.4% for PMMA (95% CI, 12.9% to 51.5%; I2 = 88.5%; P < 0.01). Pooled all-cause failures were 2.2% for fresh autologous cranial bone (95% CI, 0.4% to 10.6%; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.45), 6.3% for PEEK (95% CI, 3.2% to 12.3%; I2 = 15.5%; P = 0.31), 11.4% for titanium (95% CI, 6.7% to 18.8%; I2 = 60.8%; P < 0.01), and 12.7% for PMMA (95% CI, 6.9% to 22.0%; I2 = 64.8%; P < 0.01). Meta-regression models indicated that each alloplastic subtype significantly and independently predicted higher complications, whereas titanium and PMMA were significant predictors for all-cause failures compared with autologous bone. All 3 subtypes were predictive of higher cranioplasty failures secondary to infection compared with autologous bone.
Conclusion: Cranioplasties performed with fresh, autologous, heterotopic cranial bone grafts resulted in lower complication and failure rates compared with alloplastic materials.
期刊介绍:
For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.