Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: Composite cranial defects in the setting of infection, irradiation, or cerebrospinal fluid leak present a significant risk for devastating neurologic sequelae. Such defects require soft-tissue coverage and skeletal reconstruction that can withstand the hostile environment of a precarious wound. METHODS: Patients with high-risk composite cranial defects treated with free flap reconstruction containing a vascularized osseous component from 2003 to 2012 were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Fourteen patients received autologous vascularized cranioplasties between 2003 and 2012 with a mean age of 55.7 years and a mean follow-up of 14.1 months. Preoperatively, all patients had infection, irradiation, cerebrospinal fluid leak, or a combination thereof. Thirteen patients (92.9 percent) were reoperative cases for recurrent tumor, infection, or both. Six patients (42.9 percent) failed previous reconstructive procedures. Tissue biopsy-proven infection was present in 10 patients (71.4 percent) with calvarial osteomyelitis, both osteomyelitis and meningitis, or scalp soft-tissue infection only. Nine patients (64.3 percent) suffered from malignancy and six of these patients were irradiated preoperatively. Cranioplasty was achieved as part of a chimeric free flap using rib, scapula, both rib and scapula, or ilium. Vascularized duraplasty using serratus anterior fascia as a component of the chimeric flap was performed in three patients. No flap losses occurred and all patients had resolution of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Soft-tissue and skeletal restoration are the two critical components of composite cranial reconstruction. The authors report outcomes of the largest series of one-stage immediate cranioplasty consisting of autologous soft tissue and vascularized bone in high-risk composite cranial wounds and suggest its application in defects associated with compromised wound beds. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: