Review Cell Tissue Bank- 2021 Jan 9. doi: 10.1007/s10561-020-09897-2. Online ahead of print.
The storage of skull bone flaps for autologous cranioplasty: literature review
Vicente Mirabet 1, Daniel García 2, Nuria Yagüe 3, Luis Roberto Larrea 3, Cristina Arbona 3, Carlos Botella 2Affiliations expand
- PMID: 33423107
- DOI: 10.1007/s10561-020-09897-2
Abstract
The use of autologous bone flap for cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy is a widely used strategy that allows alleviating health expenses. When the patient has recovered from the primary insult, the cranioplasty restores protection and cosmesis, recovering fluid dynamics and improving neurological status. During this time, the bone flap must be stored, but there is a lack of standardization of tissue banking practices for this aim. In this work, we have reviewed the literature on tissue processing and storage practices. Most of the published articles are focused from a strictly clinical and surgical point of view, paying less attention to issues related to tissue manipulation. When bone resorption is avoided and the risk of infection is controlled, the autograft represents the most efficient choice, with the lowest risk of complication. Otherwise, depending on the degree of involvement, the patient may have to undergo new surgery, assuming further risks and higher healthcare costs. Therefore, tissue banks must implement protocols to provide products with the highest possible clinical effectiveness, without compromising safety. With a centralised management of tissue banking practices there may be a more uniform approach, thus facilitating the standardization of procedures and guidelines.
Keywords: Autologous bone flap; Bone infection; Bone resorption; Cranioplasty; Decompressive craniectomy; Storage; Tissue banking.
Similar articles
- Complications After In Vivo and Ex Vivo Autologous Bone Flap Storage for Cranioplasty: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature.Corliss B, Gooldy T, Vaziri S, Kubilis P, Murad G, Fargen K.World Neurosurg. 2016 Dec;96:510-515. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.025. Epub 2016 Sep 16.PMID: 27647038 Review.
- Outcomes of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy in the pediatric population.Rocque BG, Amancherla K, Lew SM, Lam S.J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2013 Aug;12(2):120-5. doi: 10.3171/2013.4.PEDS12605. Epub 2013 Jun 21.PMID: 23790219 Review.
- Factors related to failure of autologous cranial reconstructions after decompressive craniectomy.van de Vijfeijken SECM, Groot C, Ubbink DT, Vandertop WP, Depauw PRAM, Nout E, Becking AG; CranioSafe Group.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019 Sep;47(9):1420-1425. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2019.02.007. Epub 2019 Feb 16.PMID: 31353299
- Subcutaneous bone flap storage after emergency craniectomy: cost-effectiveness and rate of resorption.Ernst G, Qeadan F, Carlson AP.J Neurosurg. 2018 Dec 1;129(6):1604-1610. doi: 10.3171/2017.6.JNS17943.PMID: 29303450
- Long-Term Complications of Cranioplasty Using Stored Autologous Bone Graft, Three-Dimensional Polymethyl Methacrylate, or Titanium Mesh After Decompressive Craniectomy: A Single-Center Experience After 596 Procedures.Yeap MC, Tu PH, Liu ZH, Hsieh PC, Liu YT, Lee CY, Lai HY, Chen CT, Huang YC, Wei KC, Wu CT, Chen CC.World Neurosurg. 2019 Aug;128:e841-e850. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.005. Epub 2019 May 10.PMID: 31082551
