Can we do better at measuring patient-reported outcomes after cranioplasty? A systematic review

Outcomes of Hydroxyapatite Bone Cement for Craniofacial Reconstruction in 1983 Patients

BACKGROUND

Hydroxyapatite bone cement (HABC) has evolved to have diverse applications in craniofacial reconstruction. This ranges from filling cranial defects to secondary contouring of residual defects after primary surgeries. This study aims to determine patient outcomes after reconstruction with HABCs.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were queried. The results were limited to English-language literature with extractable data on HABC for craniofacial reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 1983 patients were included in the final analysis from 35 studies. HABCs were mostly used for large defect cranioplasty (21.5%), retrosigmoid (44.6%) and translabyrinthine cranioplasty (8.9%), and correction of residual craniofacial defects after congenital craniofacial surgeries (25%). The rates of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak and infection/explantation were 0% and 7.5% [95% CI: 2.4-11.8] for large defect cranioplasty and 0.8% [0.03-2.07] and 1.5% [95% CI: 0.92-3.3] for retrosigmoid cranioplasty, respectively. The infection/explantation rate was 6.2% [95% CI: 2.6-18.7] for HABCs in the correction of residual craniofacial defects after congenital craniofacial surgeries. The total reoperation rates were 20.4% % [95% CI: 4.8-11.8] for large defect cranioplasty and 12% [95% CI: 3.3-15.3] for correction of residual defects after congenital craniofacial surgeries. Aesthetic satisfaction rates were 93.1% [95% CI: 90.3-98.8] for large defect cranioplasty, 99.4% [95% CI 97.2-99.9] for retrosigmoid cranioplasty, and 92.6% [95% CI: 83.3-95.8] for HABC use in the correction of residual craniofacial defects after congenital craniofacial surgeries.

CONCLUSION

HABC is versatile and associated with a high level of patient reported aesthetic satisfaction after cranioplasty and may have a comparably lower complication profile than those of most other alloplastic materials.

Daily life without cranial bone protection while awaiting cranioplasty: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Decompressive craniectomy is occasionally performed as a life-saving neurosurgical intervention in patients with acute severe brain injury to reduce refractory intracranial hypertension. Subsequently, cranioplasty (CP) is performed to repair the skull defect. In the meantime, patients are living without cranial bone protection, and little is known about their daily life. This study accordingly explored daily life among patients living without cranial bone protection after decompressive craniectomy while awaiting CP.

METHODS

A multiple-case study examined six purposively sampled patients, patients' family members, and healthcare staff. The participants were interviewed and the data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The cross-case analysis identified five categories: "Adapting to new ways of living," "Constant awareness of the absence of cranial bone protection," "Managing daily life requires available staff with adequate qualifications," "Impact of daily life depends on the degree of recovery," and "Daily life stuck in limbo while awaiting cranioplasty." The patients living without cranial bone protection coped with daily life by developing new habits and routines, but the absence of cranial bone protection also entailed inconveniences and limitations, particularly among the patients with greater independence in their everyday living. Time spent awaiting CP was experienced as being in limbo, and uncertainty regarding planning was perceived as frustrating.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate a vulnerable group of patients with brain damage and communication impairments struggling to find new routines during a waiting period experienced as being in limbo. Making this period safe and reducing some problems in daily life for those living without cranial bone protection calls for a person-centered approach to care involving providing contact information for the correct healthcare institution and individually planned scheduling for CP.