Journal of Trauma and Injury

The Korean Society of Traumatology (대한외상학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Cranioplasty Results after the Use of a Polyester Urethane Dural Substitute (Neuro-Patch®) as an Adhesion Prevention Material in Traumatic Decompressive Craniectomy

  • Jeong, Tae Seok (Department of Trauma Surgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Woo Kyung (Department of Trauma Surgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Jang, Myung Jin (Department of Trauma Surgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center)
  • Received : 2019.08.29
  • Accepted : 2019.10.23
  • Published : 2019.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study was conducted to investigate the usefulness of a polyester urethane dural substitute (Neuro-Patch®, B. Braun, Boulogne, France) as an anti-adhesion agent in subsequent cranioplasty by analyzing the use of Neuro-Patch® during decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with traumatic brain injury who underwent decompressive craniectomy followed by cranioplasty from January 2015 to December 2018. Patients were analyzed according to whether they received treatment with Neuro-Patch® or not (Neuro-Patch® group, n=71; control group, n=55). Patients' baseline characteristics were analyzed to identify factors that could affect cranioplasty results, including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, use of antiplatelet agents or anticoagulant medication, the interval between craniectomy and cranioplasty, and the type of bone used in cranioplasty. The cranioplasty results were analyzed according to the following factors: operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospitalization period, surgical site infection, and revision surgery due to extra-axial hematoma. Results: No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding patients' baseline characteristics. For the cranioplasty procedures, the operation time (155 vs. 190 minutes, p=0.003), intraoperative blood loss (350 vs. 450 mL, p=0.012), and number of surgical site infections (4 vs. 11 cases, p=0.024) were significantly lower in the Neuro-Patch® group than in the control group. Conclusions: The use of Neuro-Patch® was associated with a shorter operation time, less blood loss, and a lower number of surgical site infections in subsequent cranioplasties. These results may provide a rationale for prospective studies investigating the efficacy of Neuro-Patch®.

Keywords

References

  1. Cooper DJ, Rosenfeld JV, Murray L, Arabi YM, Davies AR, D'Urso P, et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1493-502. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1102077
  2. Alvis-Miranda H, Castellar-Leones SM, Moscote-Salazar LR. Decompressive craniectomy and traumatic brain injury: a review. Bull Emerg Trauma 2013;1:60-8.
  3. Bobinski L, Koskinen LO, Lindvall P. Complications following cranioplasty using autologous bone or polymethylmethacrylate-- retrospective experience from a single center. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2013;115:1788-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2013.04.013
  4. Lee CH, Cho DS, Jin SC, Kim SH, Park DB. Usefulness of silicone elastomer sheet as another option of adhesion preventive material during craniectomies. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2007;109:667-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2007.05.015
  5. Vakis A, Koutentakis D, Karabetsos D, Kalostos G. Use of polytetrafluoroethylene dural substitute as adhesion preventive material during craniectomies. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2006;108:798-802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2005.11.026
  6. Khalili H, Omidvar A, Ghaffarpasand F, Yadollahikhales G. Cranioplasty results after application of anti-adhesive films ($OrthoWrap^{TM}$) in traumatic decompressive craniectomy. Bull Emerg Trauma 2016;4:24-8.
  7. Ali Algadiem E, Aleisa AA, Alsubaie HI, Buhlaiqah NR, Algadeeb JB, Alsneini HA. Blood loss estimation using gauze visual analogue. Trauma Mon 2016;21:e34131. https://doi.org/10.5812/traumamon.34131
  8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Surgical site infection (SSI) event [Internet]. Atlanta: CDC 2017 [cited 2019 Aug 24]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/9pscssicurrent.pdf.
  9. Mumert ML, Altay T, Couldwell WT. Technique for decompressive craniectomy using Seprafilm as a dural substitute and anti-adhesion barrier. J Clin Neurosci 2012;19:455-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2011.09.004
  10. Bulters D, Belli A. Placement of silicone sheeting at decompressive craniectomy to prevent adhesions at cranioplasty. Br J Neurosurg 2010;24:75-6. https://doi.org/10.3109/02688690903506135
  11. Ichinose T, Uda T, Kusakabe T, Murata K, Sakaguchi M. Effectiveness of antiadhesion barriers in preventing adhesion for external decompression and subsequent cranioplasty. No Shinkei Geka 2007;35:151-4.
  12. Kawaguchi T, Hosoda K, Shibata Y, Koyama J. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene membrane for prevention of adhesions in patients undergoing external decompression and subsequent cranioplasty. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2003;43:320-3; discussion 324. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.43.320
  13. Huang YH, Lee TC, Chen WF, Wang YM. Safety of the nonabsorbable dural substitute in decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury. J Trauma 2011;71:533-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e318203208a
  14. Malliti M, Page P, Gury C, Chomette E, Nataf F, Roux FX. Comparison of deep wound infection rates using a synthetic dural substitute (neuro-patch) or pericranium graft for dural closure: a clinical review of 1 year. Neurosurgery 2004;54:599-603; discussion 603-4. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000108640.45371.1A
  15. Korinek AM, Golmard JL, Elcheick A, Bismuth R, van Effenterre R, Coriat P, et al. Risk factors for neurosurgical site infections after craniotomy: a critical reappraisal of antibiotic prophylaxis on 4,578 patients. Br J Neurosurg 2005;19:155-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02688690500145639
  16. Kourbeti IS, Jacobs AV, Koslow M, Karabetsos D, Holzman RS. Risk factors associated with postcraniotomy meningitis. Neurosurgery 2007;60:317-26. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000249266.26322.25
  17. Jeong TS, Yee GT. Prospective multicenter surveillance study of surgical site infection after intracranial procedures in Korea : a preliminary study. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2018;61:645-52. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2018.0021
  18. Buang SS, Haspani MS. Risk factors for neurosurgical site infections after a neurosurgical procedure: a prospective observational study at Hospital Kuala Lumpur. Med J Malaysia 2012;67:393-8.
  19. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:250-78; quiz 279-80.

Cited by

  1. A Reappraisal of the Necessity of a Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt After Decompressive Craniectomy in Traumatic Brain Injury vol.33, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.20408/jti.2020.0072