Hydroxyapatite ceramic implants for cranioplasty in children: a retrospective evaluation of clinical outcome and osteointegration.
Bioceramics
Biomimetic
Cranioplasty
Custom-made prosthesis
Hydroxyapatite
Journal
Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery
ISSN: 1433-0350
Titre abrégé: Childs Nerv Syst
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8503227
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
08
09
2019
accepted:
29
10
2019
pubmed:
2
12
2019
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
2
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cranioplasty in children is a controversial and challenging issue, since there is still no consensus on the ideal material. Main problems in paediatric age are represented by the child's growing skull, the lower bone thickness and the high incidence of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) disorders or brain swelling. Autologous bone is still considered the "gold standard". When it is not available, a wide range of alloplastic materials have been proposed. Hydroxyapatite, a ceramic-based derivative, bears a chemical composition very similar to the human natural bone, making this material a valuable alternative to other cranioplasty solutions. All patients implanted with a custom-made porous hydroxyapatite device at Santobono-Pausilipon Hospital in Naples were retrospectively reviewed. A follow-up CT scan of the skull was performed from 1 up to 48 months postoperatively to document the bone ingrowth as well as the osteointegration process. The bone density was measured as according to the Hounsfield scale at the bone-implant interface. Between 2014 and 2018, 11 patients (7 males, 4 females) underwent cranioplasty with hydroxyapatite ceramic implants (HAP). Patients' age ranged between 3 and 16 years old. Initial aetiology was trauma in most cases. Two subjects were implanted with HAP as primary cranioplasty, 9 as revision surgery following previous cranioplasty failure. Sites of the cranial defect were unilateral fronto-temporo-parietal (N = 8), unilateral frontal (N = 1) and bifrontal (N = 2). Two patients with large bilateral defects received two prostheses. In one of these, the two prostheses were explanted and replaced with two back-up implants (accounting for a total of 15 implants in 11 patients). Osteointegration was measurable for 12 out of 15 implanted devices. The mean percentage was about 51%. There were six asymptomatic prosthesis fractures (40%), all occurring within 6 months from implant. In one case, the bifrontal prostheses were explanted and replaced. This was the only patient who underwent revision surgery. Hydroxyapatite ceramic implants represent a valid alternative to other cranioplasty solutions. Where coaptation occurs correctly, with good osteointegration, implant mechanical resistance increases over time.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31786632
doi: 10.1007/s00381-019-04423-6
pii: 10.1007/s00381-019-04423-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Durapatite
91D9GV0Z28
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
551-558Références
J Neurosurg. 2017 Jan;126(1):175-183
pubmed: 26918471
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2007 Feb;149(2):161-70; discussion 170
pubmed: 17242849
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2014 Feb;13(2):243-4
pubmed: 24313656
Am Fam Physician. 2004 Jun 15;69(12):2863-70
pubmed: 15222651
World Neurosurg. 2019 Jan;121:160-165
pubmed: 30315976
Neurochirurgie. 2016 Oct;62(5):251-257
pubmed: 27543986
Childs Nerv Syst. 2007 Oct;23(10):1097-102
pubmed: 17632727
Childs Nerv Syst. 2005 Mar;21(3):200-4
pubmed: 15616854
Surg Neurol Int. 2013;4:12
pubmed: 23493459
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2010 Jan;152(1):155-9
pubmed: 19430722
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012 Apr;40(3):e65-70
pubmed: 21640597
J Neurosurg. 2004 Feb;100(2 Suppl Pediatrics):163-8
pubmed: 14758944
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Jul;44(7):789-94
pubmed: 27174495
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2015 Jan;157(1):115-21
pubmed: 25326712
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1981 Apr;44(4):285-93
pubmed: 6453957
Childs Nerv Syst. 2019 Sep;35(9):1459-1465
pubmed: 31089851
Childs Nerv Syst. 2017 Oct;33(10):1759-1768
pubmed: 29149388
Childs Nerv Syst. 2017 Feb;33(2):343-348
pubmed: 28013335
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2014 Apr;156(4):813-24
pubmed: 24532225
Childs Nerv Syst. 2018 Nov;34(11):2283-2289
pubmed: 29987377
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Oct;112(5):1312-27
pubmed: 14504515
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2015 Jun;8(2):159-70
pubmed: 26000090
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Dec;73(12):2375-8
pubmed: 26253012
J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2015 Jul 04;13(2):e136-44
pubmed: 25589160
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Apr;129(4):625e-635e
pubmed: 22183498
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2017 Jan;19(1):51-55
pubmed: 27791703
Childs Nerv Syst. 2019 Sep;35(9):1481-1490
pubmed: 30610476
J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2011 Jul;4(3):403-8
pubmed: 21887034
J Clin Neurosci. 2009 Jan;16(1):56-63
pubmed: 19046734
Neurochirurgie. 2012 Feb;58(1):25-9
pubmed: 22030170
Childs Nerv Syst. 2019 Sep;35(9):1467-1471
pubmed: 31134339
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Feb;71(2):e81-8
pubmed: 23351772
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013 Aug;115(8):1496-8
pubmed: 23273380
J Craniofac Surg. 2009 Sep;20(5):1512-8
pubmed: 19816288
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2013 Aug;12(2):120-5
pubmed: 23790219
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2012 Oct;10(4):268-72
pubmed: 22861195
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2013 May;11(5):526-32
pubmed: 23473303
Childs Nerv Syst. 2012 Jan;28(1):23-31
pubmed: 22120469