» Articles » PMID: 25541423

Computed-tomography Modeled Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Implants in Revision Cranioplasty

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2014 Dec 27
PMID 25541423
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Traditional cranioplasty methods focus on pre-operative or intraoperative hand molding. Recently, CT-guided polyether ether ketone (PEEK) plate reconstruction enables precise, time-saving reconstruction. This case series aims to show a single institution experience with use of PEEK cranioplasty as an effective, safe, precise, reusable, and time-saving cranioplasty technique in large, complex cranial defects.

Methods: We performed a 6-year retrospective review of cranioplasty procedures performed at our affiliated hospitals using PEEK implants. A total of nineteen patients underwent twenty-two cranioplasty procedures. Pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative data was collected.

Results: Nineteen patients underwent twenty-two procedures. Time interval from injury to loss of primary cranioplasty averaged 57.7 months (0-336 mo); 4.0 months (n=10, range 0-19) in cases of trauma. Time interval from primary cranioplasty loss to PEEK cranioplasty was 11.8 months for infection (n=11, range 6-25 mo), 12.2 months for trauma (n=5, range 2-27 mo), and 0.3 months for cosmetic or functional reconstructions (n=3, range 0-1). Similar surgical techniques were used in all patients. Drains were placed in 11/22 procedures. Varying techniques were used in skin closure, including adjacent tissue transfer (4/22) and free tissue transfer (1/22). The PEEK plate required modification in four procedures. Three patients had reoperation following PEEK plate reconstruction.

Conclusion: Cranioplasty utilizing CT-guided PEEK plate allows easy inset, anatomic accuracy, mirror image aesthetics, simplification of complex 3D defects, and potential time savings. Additionally, it's easily manipulated in the operating room, and can be easily re-utilized in cases of intraoperative course changes or infection.

Citing Articles

The World's first 3D-printed PEEK cranial implant: a new horizon in precision and personalized neurosurgery.

MohanaSundaram A, Kamalakannan Y, Raja V, Mofatteh M, Haque M Neurosurg Rev. 2024; 47(1):616.

PMID: 39271618 DOI: 10.1007/s10143-024-02867-2.


Biomaterials for Regenerative Cranioplasty: Current State of Clinical Application and Future Challenges.

He L J Funct Biomater. 2024; 15(4).

PMID: 38667541 PMC: 11050949. DOI: 10.3390/jfb15040084.


Customized Additive Manufacturing in Bone Scaffolds-The Gateway to Precise Bone Defect Treatment.

Zhou J, See C, Sreenivasamurthy S, Zhu D Research (Wash D C). 2023; 6:0239.

PMID: 37818034 PMC: 10561823. DOI: 10.34133/research.0239.


Complications and Failures of Autologous Heterotopic Cranial Bone versus Alloplastic Cranioplasties.

Oberoi M, Mirzaie S, Huang K, Caprini R, Hu V, Dejam D Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023; 154(4):757e-772e.

PMID: 37749784 PMC: 10963343. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000011093.


Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printed PEEK/HA Composite Filaments.

Kang J, Zheng J, Hui Y, Li D Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(20).

PMID: 36297871 PMC: 9608599. DOI: 10.3390/polym14204293.