A retrospective analysis and review of an institution's experience with the complications of cranioplasty
British Journal of Neurosurgery, ISSN: 0268-8697, Vol: 27, Issue: 5, Page: 629-635
2013
- 96Citations
- 83Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations96
- Citation Indexes96
- 96
- CrossRef44
- Captures83
- Readers83
- 83
- Mentions1
- References1
- Wikipedia1
Article Description
Introduction. Cranial reconstruction with a cranioplasty is performed to repair skull defects after decompressive craniectomies. Aims. To retrospectively review all cranioplasties performed in our institution over 10 years and analyse the complications and the factors that cause complications. Patient and methods. Two hundred and forty-three cranioplasties were performed from 2000 to 2010, with a follow-up of at least 1 year. Age, sex, comorbidities, material, site of skull defect, time between decompression and cranioplasty, and rate of complications were collected from our database. Fischer's T-test and direct logistical regression were performed to identify factors that contributed to the rate of complications. p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results. Post-cranioplasty seizures (14.81%), infection and exposed implant (9.05%), haemorrhage (1.65%) and others (0.82%) were identified complications. Total percentage of complications was 25.92%. Previous trauma (p = 0.034) and intracranial haemorrhage (p = 0.019) as well as pre-cranioplasty neurological deficit (p = 0.046) were related to seizures, while pre-cranioplasty neurological deficit (p = 0.036) and exposed implant extrusion (p = 0.048) contributed to infection of cranioplasties. Discussion. Most of the seizures may be post-traumatic seizures or scar epilepsy from intracranial haemorrhage. Implant extrusions were found to be associated with infection of the implant, and they should therefore be treated early. Patient selection is important as patients with neurological deficits were susceptible to seizures and infection. Intracranial haemorrhage was caused by persistant bleeding, trauma or shunt overdrainge. Conclusion. Cranioplasty has significant complications. A thorough understanding of factors that contribute to the different types of complications will benefit the management of cranioplasty patients. © 2013 The Neurosurgical Foundation.
Bibliographic Details
Informa UK Limited
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know