PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 18, 2026European Journal of Plastic Surgery0 citationsOpen Access

A place for plastics: systematic review and quantitative analysis of multidisciplinary cranial reconstruction

View Full Paper
JBJake BarschESErion SulajDRDhruv Reddy

Key Points

  • This review aims to evaluate outcomes of cranial reconstruction using a multidisciplinary approach, focusing on complications, mortality, and revisions.
  • Conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines.
  • Selected articles from the Scopus database with specific inclusion criteria.
  • Pooled complication, mortality, and revision rates across materials and flap types.
  • Performed subgroup analysis using chi-square and relative risk calculations.
  • Among 2,692 patients, complication rate was 18.69%, mortality was 2.64%, and revision rate was 10.81%.
  • Free flaps showed higher complication and mortality rates compared to local flaps.
  • Tumor cases had the highest mortality (8.8%) compared to trauma (1.1%) and congenital cases (0.3%).
  • Titanium implants had a 5% mortality rate and higher complication risk compared to autologous bone.

Abstract

Abstract Background Cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy remains a complex procedure with significant risks of infection, resorption, and implant failure. Increasingly, multidisciplinary surgical teams (MST) composed of neurosurgeons and plastic/reconstructive surgeons have been employed to optimize outcomes. This systematic review and quantitative analysis evaluates MST outcomes, focusing on complication, mortality, and revision rates across materials, flap types, and surgical indications. Methods A systematic review was conducted following guidelines suggested by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Article selection was conducted in the Scopus database. Inclusion criteria were (1) a multidisciplinary approach between neurosurgery and plastic/reconstructive surgery, (2) cranial reconstruction, (3) a definitive flap type, and (4) reported outcomes. Exclusion criteria included any studies without relevant focus, multidisciplinary approach, or reported outcomes. Data extracted included demographics, indication, implant material, flap type, and postoperative outcomes. Complication, mortality, and revision rates were pooled. Subgroup analysis compared outcomes by indication, material, and flap type using chi-square and relative risk calculations. Results A Scopus search identified 88 studies, of which 54 met inclusion criteria. Among 2,692 patients, the overall complication rate was 18.69%, mortality 2.64%, and revision 10.81%. Free flaps were associated with higher complication, revision, and mortality rates compared to local flaps. Tumor cases showed higher mortality (8.8%) compared with trauma (1.1%) and congenital (0.3%) (χ² p < 0.001). Titanium implants carried greater mortality (5%) and complication risk (Relative risk ~ 2.6 vs. autologous). Autologous bone demonstrated the lowest mortality (0.43%) but moderate complication rates. These results are complicated by various surgical indications, showing a use of titanium implants and free flaps in more complex cases. Conclusions MST cranioplasty achieves optimized complication and revision rates in high acuity operations, though tumor indications and titanium implants confer elevated risk. Material choice and surgical indication appear to drive outcomes more than flap type. Prospective, multicenter analyses are warranted to validate MST advantages over single-surgeon practice. Level of Evidence: Not gradable.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Barsch et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/696c7835eb60fb80d1396740https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-025-02389-0
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper