Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Medpor Craniotomy Gap Wedge Designed to Fill Small Bone Defects along Cranial Bone Flap

  • Goh, Duck-Ho (Department of Neurosurgery, Science and Engineering Institute, Kyungpook National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Gyoung-Ju (Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Daegu Veterans Hospital) ;
  • Park, Jae-Chan (Department of Neurosurgery, Science and Engineering Institute, Kyungpook National University College of Medicine)
  • Published : 2009.09.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective : Medpor porous polyethylene was used to reconstruct small bone defects (gaps and burr holes) along a craniotomy bone flap. The feasibility and cosmetic results were evaluated. Methods : Medpor Craniotomy Gap Wedges, V and T, were designed. The V implant is a 10 cm-long wedge strip, the cross section of which is an isosceles triangle with a 4 mm-long base, making it suitable for gaps less than 4 mm after trimming. Meanwhile, the Medpor T wedge includes a 10 mm-wide thin plate on the top surface of the Medpor V Wedge, making it suitable for gaps wider than 4 mm and burr holes. Sixty-eight pterional craniotomies and 39 superciliary approaches were performed using the implants, and the operative results were evaluated with respect to the cosmetic results and pain or tenderness related to the cranial flap. Results : The small bone defects were eliminated with less than 10 minutes additional operative time. In a physical examination, there were no considerable cosmetic problems regarding to the cranial bone defects, such as a linear depression or dimple in the forehead, anterior temporal hollow, preauricular depression, and parietal burr hole defect. Plus, no patient suffered from any infectious complications. Conclusion : The Medpor Craniotomy Gap Wedge is technically easy to work with for reconstructing small bone defects, such as the bone gaps and burr holes created by a craniotomy, and produces excellent cosmetic results.

Keywords

References

  1. Couldwell WT, Chen TC, Weiss MH, Fukushima T, Dougherty W : Cranioplasty with the Medpor porous polyethylene Flexblock implant. Technical note. J Neurosurg 81 : 483-486, 1994 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1994.81.3.0483
  2. Couldwell WT, Stillerman CB, Dougherty W : Reconstruction of the skull base and cranium adjacent to sinuses with porous polyethylene implant : preliminary report. Skull Base Surg 7 : 57-63, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1058609
  3. DiMeco F, Li KW, Mendola C, Cantú G, Solero CL : Craniotomies without burr holes using an oscillating saw. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 146 : 995-1001; discussion 1001, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-004-0322-4
  4. Dujovny M, Aviles A, Cuevas P : Bone-like polyethylene burr-hole cover. Neurol Res 27 : 333-334, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1179/016164105X22138
  5. Ferroli P, Franzini A, Marchetti M, Maccagnano E, Broggi G : Craniotomy using image-guided oscillating saw : technical note. Neurol Res 28 : 145-148, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1179/016164106X98017
  6. Frodel JL, Lee S : The use of high-density polyethylene implants in facial deformities. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 124 : 1219-1223, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.124.11.1219
  7. Kobayashi S, Hara H, Okudera H, Takemae T, Sugita K : Usefulness of ceramic implants in neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 21 : 751-755, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-198711000-00032
  8. Koyama J, Hongo K, Iwashita T, Kobayashi S : A newly designed key-hole button. J Neurosurg 93 : 506-508, 2000 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2000.93.3.0506
  9. Mathur KK, Tatum SA, Kellman RM : Carbonated apatite and hydroxyapatite in craniofacial reconstruction. Arch Facial Plast Surg 5 : 379-383, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.5.5.379
  10. Park J, Guthikonda M : The Medpor sheet as a sellar buttress after endonasal transsphenoidal surgery : technical note. Surg Neurol 61 : 488-492; discussion 493, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-3019(03)00581-0
  11. Poetker DM, Pytynia KB, Meyer GA, Wackym PA : Complication rate of transtemporal hydroxyapatite cement cranioplasties : a case series review of 76 cranioplasties. Otol Neurotol 25 : 604-609, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/00129492-200407000-00031
  12. Romano JJ, Iliff NT, Manson PN : Use of medpor porous polyethylene implants in 140 patients with facial fractures. J Craniofac Surg 4 : 142-147, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1097/00001665-199307000-00007
  13. Schantz JT, Lim TC, Ning C, Teoh SH, Tan KC, Wang SC, et al. : Cranioplasty after trephination using a novel biodegradable burr hole cover : technical case report. Neurosurgery 58 (1 Suppl) : ONS-E176; discussion ONS-E176, 2006
  14. Schessel DA, Rowed DW, Nedzelski JM, Feghali JG : Postoperative pain following excision of acoustic neuroma by the suboccipital approach : observations on possible cause and potential amelioration. Am J Otol 14 : 491-494, 1993

Cited by

  1. The Efficacy of Temporal Mesh Plate Floating Technique for Keyhole Site Depression after Frontotemporal Craniotomy vol.7, pp.2, 2011, https://doi.org/10.13004/jknts.2011.7.2.78
  2. A Novel Concept for Smart Trepanation vol.23, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0b013e318241dc53
  3. Unruptured Supraclinoid Internal Carotid Artery Aneurysm Surgery : Superciliary Keyhole Approach versus Pterional Approach vol.52, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2012.52.4.306
  4. Preoperative percutaneous mapping of the frontal branch of the facial nerve to assess the risk of frontalis muscle palsy after a supraorbital keyhole approach : Clinical article vol.118, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.1.jns121525
  5. Superciliary Keyhole Approach for Unruptured Anterior Circulation Aneurysms : Surgical Technique, Indications, and Contraindications vol.56, pp.5, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2014.56.5.371
  6. Biodegradable Mineralized Collagen Plug for the Reconstruction of Craniotomy Burr-Holes: A Report of Three Cases vol.1, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.18679/cn11-6030_r.2015.002
  7. Pterional versus superciliary keyhole approach: direct comparison of approach-related complaints and satisfaction in the same patient vol.130, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.jns171167
  8. Pterional versus superciliary keyhole approach: direct comparison of approach-related complaints and satisfaction in the same patient vol.130, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.jns171167
  9. Letter to the Editor. Minimally invasive techniques: the new frontier in neurosurgery vol.130, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.6.jns181491
  10. Letter to the Editor. Minimally invasive techniques: the new frontier in neurosurgery vol.130, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.6.jns181491
  11. Letter to the Editor. Minimally invasive techniques: the new frontier in neurosurgery vol.130, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.6.jns181491
  12. Cranial reconstruction using prefabricated direct 3DP porous polyethylene vol.26, pp.2, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1108/rpj-08-2018-0209
  13. Cranial reconstruction using a polycaprolactone implant after burr hole trephination vol.4, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.2217/3dp-2019-0022
  14. Esthetics outcomes in patients submitted to pterional craniotomy and its variants: A scoping review vol.12, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.25259/sni_485_2021