Consensus on the prevention and repair of titanium mesh exposed wound after cranioplasty (2024 edition)

Abstract

Titanium mesh exposure after cranioplasty is the most serious complication of this procedure. Although some clinical experience has been gradually accumulated over the years in the diagnosis and treatment of titanium mesh exposure, the treatment is often not standardized and it is difficult to achieve satisfactory repair results due to insufficient understanding of its pathogenesis and concurrent infections. To normalize the diagnosis and treatment of titanium mesh exposed wounds after cranioplasty and improve the therapeutic effect and the quality of life of patients, the Wound Repair Professional Committee of Chinese Medical Doctor Association organized an expert discussion based on the literature and current diagnosis and treatment status of titanium mesh exposed wounds after cranioplasty at home and abroad, and reached a consensus on the pathogenesis, preventive measures, and diagnosis and treatment strategies of titanium mesh exposed wounds after cranioplasty to provide reference for relevant clinicians.

Keywords

Head injuries/penetrating / Postoperative complications / Surgical flaps / Cranioplasty / Titanium mesh / Wound repair / Expert consensus

References

[1] Schaller B, Graf R, Sanada Y, Rosner G, Wienhard K, Heiss WD.Hemodynamic and metabolic effects of decompressive hemicraniectomy in normal brain. An experimental PET-study in cats. Brain Res 2003; 982: 31-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-8993(03)02900-7.

[2] Jeyaraj P. Importance of early Cranioplasty in reversing the “syndrome of the trephine/motor trephine syndrome/sinking skin flap syndrome”. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2015; 14: 666-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-014-0673-1.

[3] Halani SH, Chu JK, Malcolm JG, Rindler RS, Allen JW, Grossberg JA, et al. Effects of cranioplasty on cerebral blood flow following decompressive craniectomy: a systematic review of the literature. Neurosurgery 2017; 81: 204-16. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyx054.

[4] Yang J, Sun T, Yuan Y, Li X, Yu H, Guan J. Evaluation of titanium mesh cranioplasty and polyetheretherketone cranioplasty: protocol for a multicentre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e033997. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033997.

[5] Kung WM, Lin FH, Hsiao SH, Chiu WT, Chyau CC, Lu SH, et al. New reconstructive technologies after decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury: the role of three-dimensional titanium mesh. J Neurotrauma 2012; 29: 2030-7. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2220.

[6] Cheng YK, Weng HH, Yang JT, Lee MH, Wang TC, Chang CN. Factors affecting graft infection after cranioplasty. J Clin Neurosci 2008; 15: 1115-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2007.09.022.

[7] Cheng B, Tian J, Peng Y, Fu X. Iatrogenic wounds: a common but often overlooked problem. Burns Trauma 2019; 7: 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41038-019-0155-2.

[8] Iaccarino C, Kolias A, Adelson PD, Rubiano AM, Viaroli E, Buki A, et al. Consensus statement from the international consensus meeting on post-traumatic cranioplasty. Acta Neurochir 2021; 163: 423-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-020-04663-5.

[9] OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group.“The Oxford Levels of Evidence 2”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebmlevels-of-evidence.

[10] Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Greenhalgh T, Heneghan C, Liberati A, et al. “ The 2011 Oxford CEBM Levels of Evidence (Introductory Document)”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence.

[11] Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, Greenhalgh T, Heneghan C, Liberati A, et al. “ Explanation of the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence (Background Document)”. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebmlevels-of-evidence.

[12] Mukherjee S, Thakur B, Haq I, Hettige S, Martin AJ. Complications of titanium cranioplasty-a retrospective analysis of 174 patients. Acta Neurochir 2014; 156: 989-98 discussion 998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2024-x.

[13] Maqbool T, Binhammer A, Binhammer P, Antonyshyn OM. Risk factors for titanium mesh implant exposure following Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2018; 29: 1181-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004479.

[14] Yeap MC, Tu PH, Liu ZH, Hsieh PC, Liu YT, Lee CY, et al. Long-term complications of cranioplasty using stored autologous bone graft, three-dimensional polymethyl methacrylate, or titanium mesh after decompressive craniectomy: a single-Center experience after 596 procedures. World Neurosurg 2019; 128: e841-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.005.

[15] Williams LR, Fan KF, Bentley RP.Custom-made titanium cranioplasty: early and late complications of 151 cranioplasties and review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015; 44: 599-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.09.006.

[16] Cabraja M, Klein M, Lehmann TN. Long-term results following titanium cranioplasty of large skull defects. Neurosurg Focus 2009; 26: E10. https://doi.org/10.3171/2009.3.FOCUS091.

[17] Zhang Q, Yuan Y, Li X, Sun T, Zhou Y, Yu H, et al. A large Multicenter retrospective research on embedded Cranioplasty and covered Cranioplasty. World Neurosurg 2018; 112: e645-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.114.

[18] Rosenthal G, Ng I, Moscovici S, Lee KK, Lay T, Martin C, et al. Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large cranial defects: a 3-Center experience. Neurosurgery 2014; 75: 523-9. https://doi.org/10.1227/Neu.0000000000000477.

[19] Thien A, King NK, Ang BT, Wang E, Ng I. Comparison of polyetheretherketone and titanium cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy. World Neurosurg 2015; 83: 176-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.06.003.

[20] Yang J, Sun T, Yuan Y, Li X, Yu H, Guan J. Evaluation of titanium cranioplasty and polyetheretherketone cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury: a prospective, multicenter, non-randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2020; 99: e21251. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000021251.

[21] Kwiecien GJ, Rueda S, Couto RA, Hashem A, Nagel S, Schwarz GS, et al. Long-term outcomes of Cranioplasty: titanium mesh is not a long-term solution in high-risk patients. Ann Plast Surg 2018; 81: 416-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001559.

[22] Zanaty M, Chalouhi N, Starke RM, Clark SW, Bovenzi CD, Saigh M, et al. Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases. J Neurosurg 2015; 123: 182-8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.9.JNS14405.

[23] Bader ER, Kobets AJ, Ammar A, Goodrich JT. Factors predicting complications following cranioplasty. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2022; 50: 134-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2021.08.001.

[24] Klieverik VM, Robe PA, Muradin MSM, Woerdeman PA. Development of a prediction model for Cranioplasty implant survival following Craniectomy. World Neurosurg 2023; 175: e693-703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2023.04.008.

[25] Tsianaka E, Singh A, Drosos E, Fountas K. Direct consequences of Cranioplasty to the brain: intracranial pressure study. J Craniofac Surg 2021; 32: 2779-83. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000007945.

[26] Yoshioka N, Tominaga S. Titanium mesh implant exposure due to pressure gradient fluctuation. World Neurosurg 2018; 119: e734-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.255.

[27] Zhang SL, Lee H, Cai EZ, Yap YL, Yeo TT, Lim TC, et al. Dermointegration in the exposed titanium cranioplasty: a possible protective phenomenon. J Surg Case Rep 2021; 2021: rjaa551. https://doi.org/10.1093/jscr/rjaa551.

[28] Kan D, He X, Liu B, Yang C, Zou Y. Full-thickness skin regeneration beneath the exposed titanium mesh in cranioplasty: two cases report. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023; 102: e34821. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000034821.

[29] Zhu JP, Sun Y, Zhang JP, et al. Computed tomographic scalp perfusion in assessing pre-and post-operative blood perfusion of scalp flaps in cranioplasty. Chin J Clin Med Imag 2017; 28: 675-6. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-1062.2017.09.018.

[30] Yano T, Okazaki M, Tanaka K, Iida H. The flap sandwich technique for a safe and aesthetic Skull Base reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2016; 76: 193-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000000507.

[31] Okada Y, Narushima M, Banda CH, Danno K, Mitsui K, Shiraishi M, et al. Accelerated Cranioplasty with perforator-preserved split flap sandwiched plate for treatment of infected cranial defects. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022; 10: e4234. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004234.

[32] Wang W, Vincent A, Bahrami A, Shokri T, Inman J, Ducic Y. Progressive scalp thinning over mesh Cranioplasty and the role of Lipotransfer. Laryngoscope 2020; 130: 1926-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.28463.

[33] Sahoo NK, Tomar K, Thakral A, Rangan NM. Complications of Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2018; 29: 1344-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000004478.

[34] Koller M, Rafter D, Shok G, Murphy S, Kiaei S, Samadani U. A retrospective descriptive study of cranioplasty failure rates and contributing factors in novel 3D printed calcium phosphate implants compared to traditional materials. 3D Print Med 2020; 6: 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-020-00066-5.

[35] Singh M, Ricci JA, Dunn IF, Caterson EJ. Alloderm covering over titanium Cranioplasty may minimize contour deformities in the frontal bone position. J Craniofac Surg 2016; 27: 1292-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002796.

[36] Dos Santos Rubio EJ, Bos EM, Dammers R, Koudstaal MJ, Dumans AG. Two-stage Cranioplasty: tissue expansion directly over the Craniectomy defect prior to Cranioplasty. Cranio-maxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2016; 9: 355-60. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1549011.

[37] Kim H, Sung SO, Kim SJ, Kim SR, Park IS, Jo KW. Analysis of the factors affecting graft infection after cranioplasty. Acta Neurochir 2013; 155: 2171-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-013-1877-8.

[38] Huang Z, Lei C, Zhang L, Xue H, Shen J, Wu S, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy with chymotrypsin irrigation: a maximal implant retention procedure treating the exposure/infection of titanium mesh in Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31: 522-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006214.

[39] Zhou YP. Clinical practice and progress in the application of negative pressure therapy for wounds. Chin J Injury and Repair (electronic edition) 2009; 4: 4-5.

[40] Wang YC, Wu YC, Chang CW, Chung CL, Lee SS. An algorithmic approach of reconstruction for cranioplasty failure: a case series. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023; 102: e33011. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000033011.

[41] Takumi I, Akimoto M. One-stage reconstruction using a vascularized calvarial flap for intractable scalp ulcers in relation with cranial implants without removing the whole prosthesis. Neurosurg Rev 2009; 32: 363-8 discussion 368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-009-0196-2.

[42] Chen B, Li W, Chen D, Fu S, Gao Y, Li R, et al. Partial titanium mesh explantation cured post-cranioplasty implant-associated scalp infection. J Clin Neurosci 2017; 44: 196-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.060.

[43] Zhao J, Song G, Zong X, Yang X, du L, Guo X, et al. Using the reversed Temporal Island flap to cover small forehead defects from titanium mesh exposure after cranial reconstruction. World Neurosurg 2018; 112: e514-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.070.

[44] Wei Z, Yang X, Lin T, Zhu J, Fang X, Zhu Y, et al. Application of autogenous dermis combined with local flap transplantation in repair of titanium mesh exposure after Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2023; 34: 759-63. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000009118.

[45] Liang RC, Cui SH, Yang F, et al. Clinical analysis of 16 cases of superficial temporal fascia transfer combined with free skin grafting for repairing skull titanium mesh exposure. Med Sci J Central South China 2014; 42: 613-5. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2095-1116.2014.06.021.

[46] Taliat G, Kumar KM, Shivalingappa S. Salvage of a large exposed cranial implant on irradiated necrosed scalp using free latissimus dorsi and forehead flaps-a case report. Acta Chir Plast 2022; 64: 89-92. https://doi.org/10.48095/ccachp202289.

[47] Dong L, Dong Y, Liu C, Geng J, Liu H, Pei J, et al. Latissimus Dorsi-Myocutaneous flap in the repair of titanium mesh exposure and scalp defect after Cranioplasty. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31: 351-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006016.

[48] Othman S, Azoury SC, Tecce MG, Shakir S, Rios-Diaz AJ, Mauch JT, et al. Free flap reconstruction of complex oncologic scalp defects in the setting of mesh Cranioplasty: risk factors and outcomes. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31: 1107-10. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006421.

[49] Han Y, Chen Y, Han Y, Chen Z, Li L, Pu W, et al. The use of free myocutaneous flap and implant reinsertion for staged cranial reconstruction in patients with titanium mesh exposure and large skull defects with soft tissue infection after cranioplasty: report of 19 cases. Microsurgery 2021; 41: 637-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.30800.

[50] Mundinger GS, Latham K, Friedrich J, Louie O, Said H, Birgfeld C, et al. Management of the Repeatedly Failed Cranioplasty Following Large Postdecompressive Craniectomy: establishing the efficacy of staged free latissimus Dorsi transfer/tissue expansion/custom Polyetheretherketone implant reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg 2016; 27: 1971-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000003043.

[51] Ma FX, Ren P, Cao J, Bian YQ, Zhou JH, Zhao CY. Clinical application of three-dimensional printed preformed titanium mesh combined with free latissimus dorsi muscle flap in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma with skull defect in the vertex. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 2022; 38: 341-6. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20201221-00538.

[52] Vargo JD, Przylecki W, Andrews BT. Surgical decision-making in microvascular reconstruction of composite scalp and skull defects. J Craniofac Surg 2020; 31: 1895-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000006623.

[53] Liang PF, Xu XS, Zhang PH, Bi CL, Zhang H, Huang MT, et al. Repair methods of complex facial defect wounds involving paranasal sinuses and their clinical effectiveness. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 2023; 39: 221-7. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20221130-00520.

[54] Ji P, Hu DH, Han F, Yang C, Zhang Z, Tong L, et al. Clinical effects of expanded flap in repairing the wounds with exposed titanium mesh after cranioplasty with titanium mesh. Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 2021; 37: 752-7. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20200613-00306.

[55] Liu DH, Feng J, Sun CF, et al. 31 cases of titanium mesh exposure after cranioplasty. Chin J Burns 2013; 29: 212-21. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1009-2587.2013.02.031.

[56] Zhao YH, Feng YH, Deng HT, Huang WQ, Xu LH, Meng XP, et al. Therapeutic strategies for retention of cranioplasty titanium mesh after mesh exposure. Acta Neurochir 2022; 164: 3101-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-022-05365-w.