Clinical Outcomes After Cranioplasty With Titanium Mesh, Polyetheretherketone, or Composite Bone Cement: A Retrospective Study

Abstract

Cranioplasty is a common neurosurgical procedure; however, the optimal material choice remains controversial. At the time of this writing, autologous bone, the preferred choice for primary cranioplasty, has a high incidence of complications such as infection and resorption, thus requiring frequent use of synthetic materials. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the clinical benefits of titanium mesh (Ti), polyetheretherketone (PEEK), and composite bone cement (CBC) in cranioplasty to provide a clear selection basis for clinicians and patients. This study retrospectively collected data from 207 patients who underwent cranioplasty with Ti (n=129), PEEK (n=54), and CBC (n=24) between January 2018 and December 2020 at Henan Provincial People’s Hospital. Postoperative follow-up information after 6 months was used to compare the long-term effects of the 3 materials on the patients. There were no significant differences in the overall complication rate after cranioplasty among the 3 materials. However, subcutaneous effusion was more frequent with PEEK (24.07%) and CBC (20.83%) than with Ti (2.33%). Second, there were no significant differences in the increase in Glasgow Outcome Scale and Karnofsky Performance Status scores after cranioplasty among the 3 materials. Finally, we found that PEEK had the highest patient satisfaction and hospitalization cost, whereas the opposite was true for Ti. Although the surgical outcomes of the 3 implant materials were similar, an examination of clinical outcomes such as patient satisfaction showed significant differences, deepening people’s perceptions of the 3 materials.