Article Sidebar

pdf
Date Published: 27/01/2025
Abstract Views: 234
Views pdf: 162
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v546i1.12489
Issue
Vol. 546 No. 1 (2025)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Lê, T. A., Nguyễn, V. H., & Vũ, N. G. (2025). EVALUATION OF CRANIOPLASTY RESULTS USING AUTOLOGOUS BONE AT THAI NGUYEN CENTRAL HOSPITAL. Vietnam Medical Journal, 546(1). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v546i1.12489

EVALUATION OF CRANIOPLASTY RESULTS USING AUTOLOGOUS BONE AT THAI NGUYEN CENTRAL HOSPITAL

Tuấn Anh Lê, Vũ Hoàng Nguyễn, Ngọc Giang Vũ

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the results of cranioplasty using autologous bone at Thai Nguyen Central hospital. Subjects: 97 patients who met the selection criteria were operated on at Thai Nguyen Central hospital  from January 2022 to June 2024. Method: Descriptive study. Results: Among the 97 patients who underwent surgery, 91,7% had favorable outcomes, while 8,3% had unfavorable outcomes. The complication rate was 26,80%, with the most common being infection (9,3%), epilepsy (7,2%), and bone resorption (4,1%). Conclusion: The results showed no statistically significant differences in complication rates across age groups, gender, comorbidities, surgical time, or graft placement. However, a higher complication rate was observed in cases with longer surgical times. This study emphasizes the importance of managing risk factors to reduce postoperative complications.

Article Details

Keywords

Cranioplasty, autologous bone graft, postoperative complications, infection, epilepsy, bone resorption

References

Alkhaibary A, Alharbi A, Alnefaie N, Oqalaa Almubarak A, Aloraidi A, Khairy S. Cranioplasty: A Comprehensive Review of the History, Materials, Surgical Aspects, and Complications. World neurosurgery. 2020;139:445-452.
2. Pfnür A, Tosin D, Petkov M, Sharon O, Mayer B, Wirtz CR, et al. Exploring complications following cranioplasty after decompressive hemicraniectomy: A retrospective bicenter assessment of autologous, PMMA and CAD implants. Neurosurgical Review. 2024; 47(1):72.
3. Raju D, Bhosle R, Patel S, Bhattacharyya A, Aditya G, Krishnan P. Complications after Cranioplasty: A Pictorial Narrative with Techniques to Manage and Avoid the Same. Indian Journal of Neurotrauma. 2023;20.
4. Schuss P, Vatter H, Oszvald A, Marquardt G, Imöhl L, Seifert V, Güresir E. Bone flap resorption: risk factors for the development of a long-term complication following cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(2):91-95.
5. Dünisch P, Walter J, Sakr Y, Kalff R, Waschke A, Ewald C. Risk factors of aseptic bone resorption: a study after autologous bone flap reinsertion due to decompressive craniotomy. Journal of neurosurgery. 2013;118(5):1141-1147.
6. Sundseth J, Sundseth A, Berg-Johnsen J, Sorteberg W, Lindegaard KF. Cranioplasty with autologous cryopreserved bone after decompressive craniectomy: complications and risk factors for developing surgical site infection. Acta neurochirurgica.2014;156(4):805-811;discussion 811.
7. Hall WA. Cranioplasty infections--adding insult to injury. World neurosurgery. 2014;82(3-4):e435-437.
8. Still M, Kane A, Roux A, Zanello M, Dezamis E, Parraga E, et al. Independent Factors Affecting Postoperative Complication Rates After Custom-Made Porous Hydroxyapatite Cranioplasty: A Single-Center Review of 109 Cases. World Neurosurg. 2018;114:e1232-e1244.
9. Chowdhury SKR, Kumar A, Kumar P. A Retrospective Study of Complications in Cranioplasty: 7-Year Period. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2021;20(4):558-565.
10. Henry J, Amoo M, Taylor J, O'Brien DP. Complications of Cranioplasty in Relation to Material: Systematic Review, Network Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression. Neurosurgery. 2021;89(3):383-394.