Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 161, Issue 3, pp 483–491 | Cite as

Bone resorption in autologous cryopreserved cranioplasty: quantitative evaluation, semiquantitative score and clinical significance

  • Lina Raffaella BarzaghiEmail author
  • Veronica Parisi
  • Carmen Rosaria Gigliotti
  • Lodoviga Giudice
  • Silvia Snider
  • Antonio Dell’Acqua
  • Antonella del Vecchio
  • Pietro Mortini
Original Article - Neurosurgery general
  • 97 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Neurosurgery general

Abstract

Background

Changes after reimplantation of the autologous bone have been largely described. However, the rate and the extent of resorption in cranial grafts have not been clearly defined. Aim of our study is to evaluate the bone flap resorption (BFR) after cryopreservation.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients, aged 18 years or older, subjected to cranioplasty (CP) adopting autologous cryopreserved flap. The BFR was derived from the percentage of decrease in flap volume (BFR%), comparing the first post-operative computed tomography (CT) and the last one available (performed at least 1 year after surgery). We also proposed a semiquantitative scoring system, based on CT, to define a clinically workable BFR classification.

Results

After a mean ± SE follow-up of 32.5 ± 2.4 months, the bone flap volume decreased significantly (p < 0.0001). The mean BFR% was 31.7 ± 3.8% and correlated with CT-score (p < 0.001). Three BFR classes were described: mild (14.8% of cases) consisting in minimal bone remodelling, CT-score ≤ 6, mean BFR% = 3.5 ± 0.7%; moderate (51.9% of cases) corresponding to satisfactory cerebral protection, CT-score < 13, mean BFR% = 25.6 ± 2.2%; severe (33.3% of cases) consisting in loss of cerebral protection, CT-score ≥ 13, mean BFR% = 54.2 ± 3.9%. Females had higher BFR% than males (p = 0.022). BFR classes and new reconstructive surgery were not related (p = 0.58).

Conclusions

BFR was moderate or severe in 85.2% of re-implanted cryopreserved flaps. The proposed CT-score is an easy and reproducible tool to define resorption extent.

Keywords

Autologous bone cranioplasty Aseptic bone flap resorption Cryopreservation Radiological evaluation 

Abbreviations

BFR

Bone flap resorption

BFR%

Percentage of decrease in flap volume

CP

Cranioplasty

CT

Computed tomography

GOS-E

Extended–Glasgow Outcome Scale

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors are grateful to Mrs. Francesca Villa, nurse of the Neurocritical Care Unit, for her support in all steps of the cranial bone storage and reimplantation.

Compliance with ethical standards

All procedures were performed in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and no submission to institutional ethical committee was required. Written informed consent was obtained by the patient itself or, in case of subjects unable to provide it, by next of kin.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Supplementary material

701_2018_3789_MOESM1_ESM.docx (106 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 106 kb)
701_2018_3789_MOESM2_ESM.docx (37 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 36 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Aarabi B, Hesdorffer DC, Ahn ES, Aresco C, Scalea TM, Eisenberg HM (2006) Outcome following decompressive craniectomy for malignant swelling due to severe head injury. J Neurosurg 104:469–479.  https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2006.104.4.469 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bobinski L, Koskinen LO, Lindvall P (2013) Complications following cranioplasty using autologous bone or polymethylmethacrylate--retrospective experience from a single center. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 115:1788–1791.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2013.04.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brommeland T, Rydning PN, Pripp AH, Helseth E (2015) Cranioplasty complications and risk factors associated with bone flap resorption. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 23:75.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-015-0155-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng CH, Lee HC, Chen CC, Cho DY, Lin HL (2014) 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.06.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Daou B, Zanaty M, Chalouhi N, Dalyai R, Jabbour P, Yang S, Rosenwasser RH, Tjoumakaris S (2016) Low incidence of bone flap resorption after native bone cranioplasty in adults. World Neurosurg 92:89–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.04.115 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Bonis P, Frassanito P, Mangiola A, Nucci CG, Anile C, Pompucci A (2012) Cranial repair: how complicated is filling a "hole"? J Neurotrauma 29:1071–1076.  https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorfer C, Frick A, Knosp E, Gruber A (2010) Decompressive hemicraniectomy after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. World Neurosurg 74:465–471.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2010.08.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dunisch P, Walter J, Sakr Y, Kalff R, Waschke A, Ewald C (2013) Risk factors of aseptic bone resorption: a study after autologous bone flap reinsertion due to decompressive craniotomy. J Neurosurg 118:1141–1147.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.1.JNS12860 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fan MC, Wang QL, Sun P, Zhan SH, Guo P, Deng WS, Dong Q (2018) Cryopreservation of autologous cranial bone flaps for cranioplasty: a large sample retrospective study. World Neurosurg 109:e853–e859.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.10.112 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gilardino MS, Karunanayake M, Al-Humsi T, Izadpanah A, Al-Ajmi H, Marcoux J, Atkinson J, Farmer JP (2015) A comparison and cost analysis of cranioplasty techniques: autologous bone versus custom computer-generated implants. J Craniofac Surg 26:113–117.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gooch MR, Gin GE, Kenning TJ, German JW (2009) Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy: analysis of 62 cases. Neurosurg Focus 26:E9.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2009.3.FOCUS0962 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grindlinger GA, Skavdahl DH, Ecker RD, Sanborn MR (2016) Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: clinical study, literature review and meta-analysis. Springerplus 5:1605.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3251-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hng D, Bhaskar I, Khan M, Budgeon C, Damodaran O, Knuckey N, Lee G (2015) Delayed cranioplasty: outcomes using frozen autologous bone flaps. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 8:190–197.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1395383 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Honeybul S, Morrison DA, Ho KM, Lind CR, Geelhoed E (2017) A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty. J Neurosurg 126:81–90.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.12.JNS152004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Iwama T, Yamada J, Imai S, Shinoda J, Funakoshi T, Sakai N (2003) The use of frozen autogenous bone flaps in delayed cranioplasty revisited. Neurosurgery 52:591–596 discussion 595-596CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jin SW, Kim SD, Ha SK, Lim DJ, Lee H, You HJ (2017) 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.  https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.21333-17.2
  17. 17.
    Kim JH, Kim JH, Kwon TH, Chong K, Hwang SY, Yoon WK (2018) Aseptic bone flap resorption after cranioplasty with autologous bone: incidence, risk factors, and clinical implications. World Neurosurg 115:e111–e118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.03.197 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Klinger DR, Madden C, Beshay J, White J, Gambrell K, Rickert K (2014) Autologous and acrylic cranioplasty: a review of 10 years and 258 cases. World Neurosurg 82:e525–e530.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2013.08.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Korhonen TK, Salokorpi N, Niinimaki J, Serlo W, Lehenkari P, Tetri S (2018) Quantitative and qualitative analysis of bone flap resorption in patients undergoing cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy. J Neurosurg:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.JNS171857
  20. 20.
    Korhonen TK, Tetri S, Huttunen J, Lindgren A, Piitulainen JM, Serlo W, Vallittu PK, Posti JP, Finnish National Cranial Implant Registry study g (2018) Predictors of primary autograft cranioplasty survival and resorption after craniectomy. J Neurosurg:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.12.JNS172013
  21. 21.
    Lee SH, Yoo CJ, Lee U, Park CW, Lee SG, Kim WK (2014) Resorption of autogenous bone graft in cranioplasty: resorption and reintegration failure. Korean J Neurotrauma 10:10–14.  https://doi.org/10.13004/kjnt.2014.10.1.10 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malcolm JG, Mahmooth Z, Rindler RS, Allen JW, Grossberg JA, Pradilla G, Ahmad FU (2018) Autologous cranioplasty is associated with increased reoperation rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 116:60–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martin KD, Franz B, Kirsch M, Polanski W, von der Hagen M, Schackert G, Sobottka SB (2014) Autologous bone flap cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy is combined with a high complication rate in pediatric traumatic brain injury patients. Acta Neurochir 156:813–824.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2021-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Missori P, Polli FM, Rastelli E, Baiocchi P, Artizzu S, Rocchi G, Salvati M, Paolini S, Delfini R (2003) Ethylene oxide sterilization of autologous bone flaps following decompressive craniectomy. Acta Neurochir 145:899–902; discussion 902-893.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-003-0118-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moreira-Gonzalez A, Jackson IT, Miyawaki T, Barakat K, DiNick V (2003) Clinical outcome in cranioplasty: critical review in long-term follow-up. J Craniofac Surg 14:144–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Piedra MP, Ragel BT, Dogan A, Coppa ND, Delashaw JB (2013) Timing of cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy for ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. J Neurosurg 118:109–114.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.10.JNS121037 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Piitulainen JM, Kauko T, Aitasalo KM, Vuorinen V, Vallittu PK, Posti JP (2015) Outcomes of cranioplasty with synthetic materials and autologous bone grafts. World Neurosurg 83:708–714.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.01.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schoekler B, Trummer M (2014) Prediction parameters of bone flap resorption following cranioplasty with autologous bone. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 120:64–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.02.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schuss P, Vatter H, Marquardt G, Imohl L, Ulrich CT, Seifert V, Guresir E (2012) Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: the effect of timing on postoperative complications. J Neurotrauma 29:1090–1095.  https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schuss P, Vatter H, Oszvald A, Marquardt G, Imohl L, Seifert V, Guresir E (2013) Bone flap resorption: risk factors for the development of a long-term complication following cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy. J Neurotrauma 30:91–95.  https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2012.2542 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schwarz FDP, Walter J, Sakr Y, Kalff R, Ewald C (2016) Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: is there a rationale for an initial artificial bone-substitute implant? A single-center experience after 631 procedures. J Neurosurg.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.4.JNS159
  32. 32.
    Shoakazemi A, Flannery T, McConnell RS (2009) Long-term outcome of subcutaneously preserved autologous cranioplasty. Neurosurgery 65:505–510; discussion 510.  https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000350870.69891.86 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stevenson S, Li XQ, Davy DT, Klein L, Goldberg VM (1997) Critical biological determinants of incorporation of non-vascularized cortical bone grafts. Quantification of a complex process and structure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:1–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stieglitz LH, Fung C, Murek M, Fichtner J, Raabe A, Beck J (2015) What happens to the bone flap? Long-term outcome after reimplantation of cryoconserved bone flaps in a consecutive series of 92 patients. Acta Neurochir 157:275–280.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2310-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wallace RD, Salt C, Konofaos P (2015) Comparison of autogenous and alloplastic cranioplasty materials following impact testing. J Craniofac Surg 26:1551–1557.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001882 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zanotti B, Zingaretti N, Verlicchi A, Robiony M, Alfieri A, Parodi PC (2016) Cranioplasty: review of materials. J Craniofac Surg 27:2061–2072.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhang J, Peng F, Liu Z, Luan J, Liu X, Fei C, Heng X (2017) Cranioplasty with autogenous bone flaps cryopreserved in povidone iodine: a long-term follow-up study. J Neurosurg 127:1449–1456.  https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.8.JNS16204 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ziai WC, Port JD, Cowan JA, Garonzik IM, Bhardwaj A, Rigamonti D (2003) Decompressive craniectomy for intractable cerebral edema: experience of a single center. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 15:25–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lina Raffaella Barzaghi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Veronica Parisi
    • 1
  • Carmen Rosaria Gigliotti
    • 2
  • Lodoviga Giudice
    • 1
  • Silvia Snider
    • 1
  • Antonio Dell’Acqua
    • 3
  • Antonella del Vecchio
    • 2
  • Pietro Mortini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Neurosurgery and Gamma Knife Radiosurgery, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteVita-Salute UniversityMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of Medical Physics, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteVita-Salute UniversityMilanItaly
  3. 3.Department of Neurocritical Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific InstituteVita-Salute UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations