Eko Agus Subagio, Eko (2022) Comparison of autograft and implant cranioplasty in pediatrics: A meta-analysis. Surgical Neurology International, 13 (406). ISSN 2152-7806

	Text (Artikel) SNI-13-406.pdf Download (1MB)
	Text (Turnitin) 09 - Comparison of autograft and implant cranioplasty in pediatrics A meta-analysis.pdf Download (2MB)
	Text (Penilaian Karil) 09 - Comparison of autograft and implant cranioplasty in pediatrics A meta-analysis.pdf Download (778kB)

Abstract

Background: Cranioplasty in pediatrics is quite challenging and intricated. The ideal material for it is still debatable until now due to the limited study comparing autologous and implant grafts. This meta-analytic study was conducted to evaluate the risk of infection and revision in pediatric patients after autograft and implant cranioplasty. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A thorough literature search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and ScienceDirect database. Articles published from 2000 to 2021 were selected systematically using PRISMA based on the predetermined eligibility criteria. The relevant data were, then, analyzed and discussed. Results: A total of four publications investigating the outcome of autograft and implant cranioplasty were included and reviewed. Postoperative infection and revision rate after 126 cranioplasty procedures (both autograft or implant) from 119 patients below 21 years during time frame of study were analyzed. This meta-analysis study showed that the rate of infection and revision after cranioplasty were not different between the autograft and implant groups. Conclusion: Autograft and implant cranioplasty have no significant difference in postoperatively infection and revision rate. This study showed that cranioplasty using implant is a plausible option in pediatric patients with cranial defects, depending on the patients’ condition due to similar outcome with autograft cranioplasty. Further studies with larger population and more specific details are necessary to determine the comparison of autograft and implant material in cranioplasty procedure.

Actions (login required)

View Item