Surgical pitfalls with custom-made porous hydroxyapatite cranial implants

Abstract

Aim: Cranioplasty implants are used primarily in cases of surgical cranial decompression following pathological elevations of intracranial pressure. Available bone substitutes include porous hydroxyapatite (HA) and polymethylmethacrylate. Whichever material is used, however, prosthetic cranial implants are susceptible to intra- and postsurgical complications and even failure. The aim of this study was to investigate such occurrences in HA cranioplasty implants, seeking not only to determine the likely causes (whether correlated or not with the device itself) but also, where possible, to suggest countermeasures.

Methods: We analyzed information regarding failures or complications reported in postmarketing surveillance and clinical studies of patients treated worldwide with custom-made HA cranial implants (Custom Bone Service Fin-Ceramica Faenza, Italy) in the period 1997-2013.

Results: The two most common complications were implant fractures (84 cases, 2.9% of the total fitted) and infections (51 cases, 1.77%).

Conclusion: Although cranioplasties are superficial and not difficult types of surgery, and use of custom-made implants are often considered the “easy” option from a surgical perspective, these procedures are nonetheless plagued by potential pitfalls. If performed well they yield more than satisfactory results from the points of view of both the patient and surgeon, but lack of appropriate care can open the door to numerous potential sources of failure, which can compromise-even irreparably-the ability to heal.

Keywords

Cranial / cranioplasty / custom-made / hydroxyapatite / implants

References

[1] Nataloni A.The biomimetism to medical device quality..Riv Med2005;11:133-4

[2] Guidelines on a Medical Devices Vigilance System. MEDDEV 2.12-1 rev. 6 December 2009, European Commission; DG Enterprise and Industry. Available from: http://www.ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/files/meddev/2_12_1-rev_6-12-2009_en.pdf. [Last cited on 2014 Dec 5].

[3] Eufinger H.Individual prefabricated titanium implants in reconstructive craniofacial surgery: clinical and technical aspects of the first 22 cases..Plast Reconstr Surg1998;102:300-8

[4] Joffe J,Kahugu F,Linney A.A prospective study of computer-aided design and manufacture of titanium plate for cranioplastyand its clinical outcome..Br J Neurosurg1999;13:576-80

[5] Agner C,Park H.Delayed minimally invasive cranioplasty..Minim Invasive Neurosurg2003;46:186-90

[6] Chiarini L,Pollastri G,Ferrari F,Nocini PF.Cranioplasty using acrylic material: a new technical procedure..J Craniomaxillofac Surg2004;32:5-9

[7] Lee SC,Lee ST.Cranioplasty using polymethyl methacrylate prostheses..J Clin Neurosci2009;16:56-63

[8] White JC.Late complications following cranioplasty with alloplastic plates..Ann Surg1948;128:743-54 PMCID:PMC1514087

[9] Gürbüz MS,Berkman MZ.Infection of cranioplasty seen twenty years later..J Korean Neurosurg Soc2012;52:498-500 PMCID:PMC3539089

[10] De Bonis P,Mangiola A,Anile C.Cranial repair: how complicated is filling a "hole"?.J Neurotrauma2012;29:1071-6

[11] Zanotti B.Notes of surgical procedure..Riv Med1995;11:153-60

[12] Johnson PJ,Lydiatt WM.Salvage of an infected hydroxyapatite cement cranioplasty with preservation of the implant material..Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg2000;123:515-7

[13] Zanotti B,Robiony M.Surgical calvarial demolition and reconstruction: procedure, implants and results..Top in Med2010;16:1-19

[14] Kim H,Kim SJ,Park IS.Analysis of the factors affecting graft infection after cranioplasty..Acta Neurochir (Wien)2013;155:2171-6

[15] Chun HJ.Efficacy and safety of early cranioplasty, at least within 1 month..J Craniofac Surg2011;22:203-7

[16] Zanotti B.Surgery: useful to know..Riv Med2005;11:185-7

[17] Zanotti B.Zanotti B,Parodi PC.Craniectomia decompressiva..Cranioplastica Terapeutica.2013;TrentoNew MAGAZINE edizioni37-46

[18] Cordaro ER,Faini GP,Verlicchi A.Method to thicken the scalp in calvarian reconstruction..J Craniofac Surg2011;22:598-601

[19] Albrektsson T.Oral implant surfaces: part 1 - review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them..Int J Prosthodont2004;17:536-43

[20] Dolan EB,Tallon D,McNamara LM.Heat-shock-induced cellular responses to temperature elevations occurring during orthopaedic cutting..J R Soc Interface2012;9:3503-13 PMCID:PMC3481591

[21] Szpalski C,Wetterau M,Warren SM.Cranial bone defects: current and future strategies..Neurosurg Focus2010;29:e8