Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
Original Article
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
Original Article
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
16 (
2
); 25-34
doi:
10.56018/20241204

Cranioplasty in Neurosurgical Procedures: Experience At A Tertiary Care Centre

Associate Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
III year MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
II year MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
Professor & Head, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
Assistant Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
1st year MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, BJ Medical College, Civil Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

*Corresponding author: Dr Abhishek Chandra Email: neuro20abhi@gmail.com

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Abstract

Background:

The primary aim of this trial was to study the efficacy of various cranioplasty materials available at our tertiary center and its related complications; thereby Standardising future protocols.

Material and Methods:

A total of 100 patients were selected as per specified criteria and two groups of Cranioplasty material types were created (Autologous and Artificial). Cranioplasty was done and results were compared for types of material of cranioplasty, early and late cranioplasty, complications associated with each type and overall cosmetic yield.

Results:

Patient undergoing Artificial cranioplasty within 6 weeks of primary surgery yielded superior results than Autologous cranioplasty and also had overall lesser complications.

Conclusion:

Cranioplasty with artificial material is better than those with autologous variety and patient specific engineered 3D Mesh are the future as they have lesser complications but better cosmetic yield.

Keywords

cranioplasty
autologous
artificial

Fulltext Views
55

PDF downloads
132
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections