Analysis of the factors affecting graft infection after cranioplasty

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Hoon Kim (1)
  Seng Oun Sung (2)
  Sung Jun Kim (1)
  Seong-Rim Kim (1)
  Ik-Seong Park (1)
  Kwang Wook Jo (1)
  
• 关键词：Bone graft ; Complications ; Cranioplasty ; Decompressive craniectomy ; Infection
• 刊名：Acta Neurochirurgica
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：November 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：155
• 期：11
• 页码：2171-2176
• 全文大小：
• 作者单位：Hoon Kim (1)
  Seng Oun Sung (2)
  Sung Jun Kim (1)
  Seong-Rim Kim (1)
  Ik-Seong Park (1)
  Kwang Wook Jo (1)
  
  1. Department of Neurosurgery, The Catholic University of Korea, Bucheon St. Mary Hospital, 327 Sosa-Ro, Bucheon, Gyeonggi-do, 420-717, Korea
  2. Department of Neurosurgery, BongSeng Memorial Hospital, Busan, Korea
  
• ISSN：0942-0940

文摘

Background The predictors of graft infection after cranioplasty (GIC) following decompressive craniectomy are not well established. Knowledge of the risk factors for GIC will allow development of preventive measures designed to reduce infection rates. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of GIC. Methods A total of 85 patients underwent reconstructive cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy between January 2009 and July 2011 and had a follow-up period of > 1year; charts were reviewed retrospectively. Although autograft was used whenever possible, artificial bone was used for cranioplasty. GIC was defined as infection requiring removal of the bone graft. Results GIC occurred in six patients (7.05%). GIC was not related to the indications for craniectomy, the interval of cranioplasty, graft material, or the size of the bone defect (p=0.433, p=0.206, p=0.665, and p=0.999, respectively). The GIC rate was significantly related to previous temporalis muscle resection, preoperative subgaleal fluid collection, operative times > 120min, and postoperative wound disruptions (p=0.001, p<0.001, p=0.035, and p=0.016, respectively). Multiple logistic regression showed that the presence of a subgaleal fluid collection before cranioplasty significantly increased the risk of GIC (OR: 38.53; 95% CI: 2.7735.6; p=0.006). Conclusions The results of this study suggest that long operative times (> 120min), craniectomy with temporalis muscle resection, the presence of preoperative subgaleal fluid collection, and postoperative wound disruption may be risk factors for graft infection after cranioplasty. Surgical techniques should be developed to reduce operative time and to avoid temporalis muscle resection when possible. In addition, meticulous dural closure aimed at reducing the formation of subgaleal fluid collection is important for the prevention of graft infections after cranioplasty.