Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024:49:307-326.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-42398-7_14.

Cranial Repair in Children: Techniques, Materials, and Peculiar Issues

Affiliations
Review

Cranial Repair in Children: Techniques, Materials, and Peculiar Issues

Paolo Frassanito et al. Adv Tech Stand Neurosurg. 2024.

Abstract

Cranial repair in children deserves particular attention since many issues are still controversial. Furthermore, literature data offer a confused picture of outcome of cranioplasty, in terms of results and complication rates, with studies showing inadequate follow-up and including populations that are not homogeneous by age of the patients, etiology, and size of the bone defect.Indeed, age has merged in the last years as a risk factor for resorption of autologous bone flap that is still the most frequent complication in cranial repair after decompressive craniectomy.Age-related factors play a role also when alloplastic materials are used. In fact, the implantation of alloplastic materials is limited by skull growth under 7 years of age and is contraindicated in the first years if life. Thus, the absence of an ideal material for cranioplasty is even more evident in children with a steady risk of complications through the entire life of the patient that is usually much longer than surgical follow-up.As a result, specific techniques should be adopted according to the age of the patient and etiology of the defect, aiming to repair the skull and respect its residual growth.Thus, autologous bone still represents the best option for cranial repair, though limitations exist. As an alternative, biomimetic materials should ideally warrant the possibility to overcome the limits of other inert alloplastic materials by favoring osteointegration or osteoinduction or both.On these grounds, this paper aims to offer a thorough overview of techniques, materials, and peculiar issues of cranial repair in children.

Keywords: Bone graft; Bone splitting; Cranioplasty; Decompressive craniectomy; Decompressive craniotomy; Exchange cranioplasty; Pediatric; Reconstructive material.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Iaccarino C, Kolias A, Adelson PD, Rubiano AM, Viaroli E, Buki A, et al. Consensus statement from the international consensus meeting on post-traumatic cranioplasty. Acta Neurochir. 2021;163(2):423–40. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Frassanito P, Massimi L, Caldarelli M, Tamburrini G, Di Rocco C. Bone flap resorption in infants. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2014;13(2):243–4. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Rocque BG, Agee BS, Thompson EM, Piedra M, Baird LC, Selden NR, et al. Complications following pediatric cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: a multicenter retrospective study. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2018;22(3):225–32. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Frassanito P, Tamburrini G, Massimi L, Peraio S, Caldarelli M, Di Rocco C. Problems of reconstructive cranioplasty after traumatic brain injury in children. Childs Nerv Syst. 2017;33(10):1759–68. - PubMed - DOI
    1. Frassanito P, Massimi L, Caldarelli M, Tamburrini G, Di Rocco C. Complications of delayed cranial repair after decompressive craniectomy in children less than 1 year old. Acta Neurochir. 2012;154(5):927–33. - PubMed - DOI

Substances

LinkOut - more resources