Advertisement
Review| Volume 69, P11-16, July 2019

Risk factors for the development of seizures after cranioplasty in patients that sustained traumatic brain injury: A systematic review

Open ArchivePublished:March 21, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2019.03.014

      Highlights

      • Seizures are a recognised complication of cranioplasty after TBI.
      • Meta-analysis shows estimated incidence of 5.1%.
      • Potential risk factors include age, contusions at cranioplasty site, monopolar diathermy, and DC-cranioplasty interval.

      Abstract

      Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is used for the treatment of raised intracranial pressure secondary to traumatic brain injury. Cranioplasty is a reconstructive procedure that restores the structural integrity of the skull following (DC). Seizures are a recognised complication of cranioplasty but its incidence and risk factors in TBI patients are unclear. Accurate prognostication can help direct prophylactic and treatment strategies for seizures. In this systematic review, we aim to evaluate current literature on these factors. A PROSPERO-registered systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Data was synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively in meta-analysis where appropriate.
      A total of 8 relevant studies were identified, reporting 919 cranioplasty patients. Random-effects meta-analysis reveals a pooled incidence of post-cranioplasty seizures (PCS) of 5.1% (95% CI 2.6–8.2%). Identified risk factors from a single study included increasing age (OR 6.1, p = 0.006), contusion at cranioplasty location (OR 4.8, p = 0.015), and use of monopolar diathermy at cranioplasty (OR 3.5, p = 0.04). There is an association between an extended DC-cranioplasty interval and PCS risk although it did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.062).
      Predictive factors for PCS are poorly investigated in the TBI population to date. Heterogeneity of included studies preclude meta-analysis of risk factors. Further studies are required to define the true incidence of PCS in TBI and its predictors, and trials are needed to inform management of these patients.

      Keywords

      1. Introduction

      Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a common neurosurgical presentation, with a variable clinical phenotype depending on the severity and anatomy of injury [
      • Jordan B.D.
      The clinical spectrum of sport-related traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Ferguson P.L.
      • Smith G.M.
      • Wannamaker B.B.
      • et al.
      A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury.
      ]. A proportion of TBI patients develop uncontrollable raised intracranial pressure (ICP). In this group, an increasingly common surgical management option is decompressive craniectomy (DC), involving the removal of a bone flap to allow the brain to swell while relieving ICP [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Long-term complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ,
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. The removed flap may be stored in an abdominal pouch or a specialised refrigeration unit, or discarded depending on factors such as infection and surgeon preference [
      • Rosenthal G.
      • Ng I.
      • Moscovici S.
      • et al.
      Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large cranial defects: a 3-center experience.
      ,
      • Daou B.
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • et al.
      Low incidence of bone flap resorption after native bone cranioplasty in adults.
      ].
      After acute swelling of the brain resolves, cranioplasty is performed to restore the integrity of the skull and cerebrospinal fluid dynamics [
      • Piazza M.
      • Grady M.S.
      Cranioplasty.
      ]. It is also an important factor in restoring psychosocial functioning of the patient, and allowing subsequent rehabilitation. Depending on patient factors and surgeon preference, the skull may be reconstructed using the bone flap removed during DC (autologous), or synthetic materials such as polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium [
      • Rosenthal G.
      • Ng I.
      • Moscovici S.
      • et al.
      Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large cranial defects: a 3-center experience.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Shah A.M.
      • Jung H.
      • Skirboll S.
      Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis.
      ]. The benefits and risks associated with different cranioplasty materials are an area of active ongoing research [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomised controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty: long-term follow-up.
      ]. Another variable that may be associated with complications is the DC to cranioplasty interval – although there is conflicting evidence on the nature of this relationship [
      • Malcolm J.G.
      • Rindler R.S.
      • Chu J.K.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty and relationship to timing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
      ].
      Seizures are a recognised complication of cranioplasty [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      Complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ]. While TBI itself is known to cause epilepsy in some patients [
      • Ferguson P.L.
      • Smith G.M.
      • Wannamaker B.B.
      • et al.
      A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Temkin N.R.
      Risk factors for posttraumatic seizures in adults.
      ], increasing evidence suggests that cranioplasty can also cause new-onset seizures [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. Some patients may develop status epilepticus, a life-threatening condition that may require critical care admission, or epilepsy requiring long-term regular medication and associated lifestyle modification [
      • Mukherjee S.
      • Thakur B.
      • Haq I.
      • et al.
      Complications of titanium cranioplasty - a retrospective analysis of 174 patients.
      ]. Therefore, understanding the factors that predispose TBI patients undergoing cranioplasty to having seizures can help inform decisions regarding perioperative prophylactic antiepileptic medications [
      • Liang S.
      • Ding P.
      • Zhang S.
      • et al.
      Prophylactic levetiracetam for seizure control after cranioplasty: a multicenter prospective controlled study.
      ]. Furthermore, given that cranioplasty is often performed at a point when patients are safe for discharge or transfer from the neurosurgical unit, it is important that the potential for new onset seizures is appreciated by the wider healthcare team. Previously proposed risk factors for PCS have included increasing age, sex, severity of initial trauma, DC-cranioplasty interval, and the cranioplasty implant material [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • Starke R.M.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
      ,
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ]. This systematic review aims to define risk factors for the development of PCS and the incidence of PCS in TBI patients.

      2. Methods

      This systematic review was performed in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [
      • Moher D.
      • Liberati A.
      • Tetzlaff J.
      • et al.
      Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
      ]. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42017077310).

      2.1 Search strategy

      A multi-database (Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science) search was performed by authors RS and MZ on 23/05/2018 for articles published at any time. Difference of opinion on study inclusion was settled by consensus between authors. The search terms used were ‘cranioplasty’ or ‘post-cranioplasty’ AND ‘seizure*’ or ‘epilep*’ or ‘fits’ AND ‘traumatic brain injury’ or ‘TBI’ or ‘head injury’. The bibliography of each relevant paper was subsequently screened to identify any additional articles.

      2.2 Study selection

      Strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined prior to searching the literature. Inclusion criteria included (i) DC followed by cranioplasty in a TBI cohort, (ii) age>16, (iii) data on any risk factors such as age, gender, severity of TBI, DC-cranioplasty interval and cranioplasty material (Table 1).
      Table 1study selection criteria.
      Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria
      Patients underwent DC following traumatic brain injuryPublished in a language other than English
      Patients aged 16 or over at time of cranioplastyConference abstracts
      Includes data on any of the following:
      • Age, gender
      • Severity of trauma (defined clinically or radiologically)
      • Presence of neurological deficit
      • DC to cranioplasty interval
      • Infection at any time point
      • Cranioplasty implant material
      Underlying pathology other than TBI included such that TBI patients cannot be distinguished from the general cohort
      Considers complications after cranioplasty including seizuresPaediatric patients included such that the adult population cannot be distinguished from the general cohort
      Any full text article of any study type including case reports and case series

      2.3 Data analysis

      All included studies were evaluated with respect to patient demographics; injury-related factors (severity, radiological features); surgery-related factors (including peri-operative complications); DC-cranioplasty interval; incidence of seizures; timing of seizure onset in relation to cranioplasty; nature of seizures and the cranioplasty implant material used. Meta-analysis was conducted using OpenMeta-Analyst software [
      • Wallace B.
      • Dahebreh I.
      • Trikalinos T.
      • et al.
      Closing the gap between methodologists and end-users: R as a computational back-end.
      ]. The ROBINS-I tool was used by authors SM, FS and IB independently to assess the internal validity and risk of bias in each study [
      • Sterne J.A.
      • Hernán M.A.
      • Reeves B.C.
      • et al.
      ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.
      ]. The level of evidence of each study was defined using the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence [
      • OLoEW Group’
      The Oxford levels of evidence 2.
      ].

      3. Results

      A total of ten studies met the selection criteria [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Long-term complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ,
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      Complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ,
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ,
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ,
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. Two of these studies [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Long-term complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      Complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
      ] were excluded after closer inspection due to duplication of data in another paper [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ]. Therefore, a total of 8 studies were included for final evaluation (Fig. 1) [
      • Moher D.
      • Liberati A.
      • Tetzlaff J.
      • et al.
      Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
      ].
      Fig. 1
      Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram demonstrating the study selection process.

      3.1 Study characteristics

      Included studies were predominantly retrospective database reviews (n = 6), one prospective cohort study, and one study reporting a mixture of retrospective and prospective data (Table 2). Two studies reported cranioplasty for any indication, but identified the cases of PCS within their TBI cohort [
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ,
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ]. Some papers (n = 5) reported only an incidence of PCS without any analysis of predictive factors [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ,
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ], while remaining papers disaggregated the PCS cases from controls for factors such as baseline demographics, DC-cranioplasty interval and intra-operative techniques, allowing analysis of risk factors [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ].
      Table 2Relevant data extracted from each included study. *indicates that these odds ratios are not given in the paper but calculated by the present authors from the data given. †note that the cut-off for early vs late cranioplasty is different between these papers. PCS: post-cranioplasty seizures, OR: odds ratio, CI: confidence interval, Ti: Titanium plate cranioplasty, FND: focal neurological deficit.
      StudyTypeNumber of patientsNumber with PCSRisk factorsOR (95% CI)P-value
      Broughton 2014Retrospective database review400
      Honeybul 2014Partly retrospective, partly prospective23019
      Luo 2012Retrospective database review1615Manually-shaped Ti (vs computer-shaped)0.70 (0.11-4.32)*0.70
      Pierson 2016Retrospective database review241
      Songara 2016Prospective cohort study160
      Stephens 2010Retrospective database review1083
      Wang 2017Retrospective case-control study27032Age >506.112 (1.956-19.099)0.006
      Contusion at cranioplasty location4.82 (1.414-17.432)0.015
      Precranioplasty FND0.258 (0.081-0.821)0.019
      Artificial duraplasty (vs autologous fascia)0.206 (0.626-14.4410.007
      Use of monopolar diathermy3.456 (1.067-9.732)0.035
      Early cranioplasty (<6/12)†0.359 (0.119-1.085)0.062
      Zhang 2010Comparative analysis704Early cranioplasty (<3/12)†0.681 (0.067-6.914)*0.745
      Total91964

      3.2 Patient cohort

      In total, 919 patients who underwent cranioplasty following DC for TBI were reported. In studies reporting mean age (n = 3), the average age was 39.1 years (448 patients) [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ]. In studies reporting median age (n = 2), the reported medians were 42 (40 patients) [
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ] and 30 (230 patients) [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ]. Two studies reported only an age range of their patients, overall age 16–71 (177 patients) [
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. One study reported age in its whole cohort of cranioplasty patients but did not report that of its TBI subgroup [
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ]. Five studies reported gender (625 patients), with 75.0% being male [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. Few studies reported measures of TBI severity in their cohort of patients. Two studies reported mean Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) prior to cranioplasty, with an overall mean of 7.72 (86 patients) [
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. One study reported mean GCS prior to initial DC in their cohort of 108 patients at 7.5 [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. The remaining studies (n = 5) did not report baseline GCS or other parameters indicating TBI severity.

      3.3 Incidence of PCS

      Across included studies, 7.0% (64 out of 919 patients) developed new-onset seizures following cranioplasty. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, demonstrating an overall estimate of PCS incidence at 5.1% (95% CI 2.6–8.2%) (see Fig. 2). Only one paper (270 patients, 32 with PCS) reported the timing of new-onset seizures after cranioplasty, finding 37.5% occurred within 24 h; 15.6% between 24 h and seven days; and 46.8% more than seven days post-operatively [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ].
      Fig. 2
      Fig. 2Forest plot demonstrating the pooled incidence of PCS using the Freeman Tukey Double Arcsine Proportion in a random-effects model.

      3.4 Risk factors

      Three studies disaggregated the features of their PCS patients from controls, allowing for analysis of predictive factors [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ]. Three studies investigated complication rates comparing early and late cranioplasty with respect to DC [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ,
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. One study (16 patients) reported an absence of seizures within their one month follow up period, in both early and late cranioplasty groups [
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ].
      While the other two studies did observe seizures in their cohorts, their defined cut-off between ‘early’ and ‘late’ cranioplasty was different, at three months [
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ] and six months [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ], preventing meta-analysis. The first study (70 patients) compared the frequency of PCS in patients with DC-cranioplasty interval <3 months with those >3 months, and compared the effect of suturing the dura during DC. No significant difference was seen in frequency of PCS when comparing these groups [
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ]. The other study (270 patients) demonstrated a potential effect of late cranioplasty (>6 months) on PCS in multivariate analysis, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.062) [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. In addition, this particularly increased risk of immediate and early (<7 days) seizures compared to late ones, but statistical significance was not reported [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ].
      One study (161 patients) compared the outcomes of two methods for shaping titanium plate used for cranioplasty in a non-randomised study [
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ]. The frequency of PCS was not significantly different between the computer-shaped and manually-shaped groups. Other studies (n = 4) included patients with a mix of autologous, titanium and synthetic cranioplasty materials, but frequency of PCS in each subgroup was not delineated [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ,
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ].
      One study (270 patients) employed a case-control design comparing PCS patients with healthy controls on multivariate analysis [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. The significant independent predictive factors were age>50, contusion at location of cranioplasty, and focal neurological deficit prior to cranioplasty (Table 2). No significant effect of cranioplasty infection on PCS risk was seen (OR 3.01, 95% CI 0.626–14.441) [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ].

      3.5 Level of evidence and risk of bias

      With respect to level of evidence, all included studies were level 4. Of included studies, five were at moderate risk of bias, two were at serious risk and one was at low risk (see Table 3). Serious risk of bias was assigned to one study due to very short follow up time [
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ], and to another because it did not account for confounding between study groups, did not report follow up time and was unclear whether patients were randomly allocated to the different intervention groups [
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ]. The reasons for papers being assigned a moderate risk of bias was retrospective data collection, and a variable follow up time within their cohorts.
      Table 3Risk of bias assessments using the ROBINS-I tool.
      StudyOverall risk of bias regarding PCS
      Broughton 2014Moderate
      Honeybul 2014Moderate
      Luo 2012Moderate
      Pierson 2016Moderate
      Songara 2016Serious
      Stephens 2010Moderate
      Wang 2017Low
      Zhang 2010Serious

      4. Discussion

      Seizures are an important complication after TBI, as well as after cranioplasty. Uncertainty remains regarding management of PCS and the provision of prophylactic anti-epileptic medication. In this systematic review, we aimed to investigate potential risk factors and the incidence of PCS in the TBI cohort of cranioplasty patients.

      4.1 Incidence of PCS

      Our meta-analysis demonstrates a PCS incidence of 5.1% in the TBI cohort of patients. Observed statistical heterogeneity and paucity of high quality, prospective studies with sufficient follow up periods affect the reliability of this estimate. Indeed, several recent prospective studies of PCS in cohorts of mixed underlying pathology have found incidences in the range 12.5–17.3% [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Liang S.
      • Ding P.
      • Zhang S.
      • et al.
      Prophylactic levetiracetam for seizure control after cranioplasty: a multicenter prospective controlled study.
      ,
      • Chen F.
      • Duan Y.
      • Li Y.
      • et al.
      Use of an antiepileptic drug to control epileptic seizures associated with cranioplasty: a randomized controlled trial.
      ,
      • Bender A.
      • Heulin S.
      • Röhrer S.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty may improve outcome in neurological patients with decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. However, PCS incidence in the TBI cohort alone cannot be deduced from these studies. Also, several studies that investigate the complications of PCS do not explore the incidence of seizures [
      • Chibbaro S.
      • Di Rocco F.
      • Mirone G.
      • et al.
      Decompressive craniectomy and early cranioplasty for the management of severe head injury: a prospective multicenter study on 147 patients.
      ,
      • Sobani Z.A.
      • Shamim M.S.
      • Zafar S.N.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: an institutional audit and analysis of factors related to complications.
      ,
      • Höhne J.
      • Werzmirzowsky K.
      • Ott C.
      • et al.
      Outcomes of cranioplasty with preformed titanium versus freehand molded polymethylmethacrylate implants.
      ,
      • Schuss P.
      • Vatter H.
      • Marquardt G.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: the effect of timing on postoperative complications.
      ]. This may reflect a lack of recognition of PCS as a procedural complication, or that seizures were not observed in these series. The incidence of post-traumatic seizures in severe TBI is 13.6% [
      • Ferguson P.L.
      • Smith G.M.
      • Wannamaker B.B.
      • et al.
      A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury.
      ].

      4.2 Patient demographics

      The demographics of the patient cohort in this review is consistent with the larger TBI population, with a male preponderance and an average age of approximately 40 years [
      • Faul M.
      • Xu L.
      • Wald M.
      • et al.
      Traumatic brain injury in the United States.
      ]. Only one included study examined the effect of age on PCS risk, demonstrating that age over 50 years was associated with greater risk in multivariate regression (OR 6.1) [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. This association with increasing age has been reproduced in studies of PCS with mixed underlying pathology [
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • Starke R.M.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
      ], and increasing age has been shown to increase risk of complications of cranioplasty in general [
      • Chang V.
      • Hartzfeld P.
      • Langlois M.
      • et al.
      Outcomes of cranial repair after craniectomy.
      ]. Studies of cranioplasty patients with various underlying pathologies have demonstrated associations between male gender and risk of PCS [
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • Starke R.M.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
      ,
      • Creutzfeldt C.J.
      • Tirschwell D.L.
      • Kim L.J.
      • et al.
      Seizures after decompressive hemicraniectomy for ischaemic stroke.
      ]. We did not find a similar effect in the TBI cohort, which may be a result of the male preponderance.

      4.3 Severity of TBI

      Current evidence suggests that severity of trauma is predictive of risk of post-traumatic seizures [
      • Ferguson P.L.
      • Smith G.M.
      • Wannamaker B.B.
      • et al.
      A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury.
      ]. However, included studies did not provide sufficient details to allow analysis of the effect of severity of TBI on risk of PCS. Interestingly, Wang et al demonstrated that focal neurological deficit prior to cranioplasty was associated with a reduced risk of PCS [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. In contrast, one study of cranioplasty patients with mixed underlying pathology demonstrated the opposite; presence of neurological deficit was associated with an increased risk of PCS [
      • Lee L.
      • Ker J.
      • Quah B.L.
      • et al.
      A retrospective analysis and review of an institution’s experience with the complications of cranioplasty.
      ]. Further studies are required to clarify (i) the relationship between severity of trauma and PCS, and (ii) whether neurological deficit correlates with risk of PCS in a pathology dependent manner. Also, Wang et al found that presence of cerebral contusion at the cranioplasty site increased risk of PCS [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. It is known that patients with cerebral contusions and resulting neuroinflammation are at greater risk of post-traumatic seizures [
      • Riascos D.
      • Buriticá E.
      • Jiménez E.
      • et al.
      Neurodegenerative diversity in human cortical contusion: histological analysis of tissue derived from decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. However, these findings suggest that the mechanical forces applied during the cranioplasty procedure itself could further increase risk of seizure activity originating at the site.

      4.4 Timing of cranioplasty

      Our review suggests that a greater DC-cranioplasty interval is associated with an increased PCS risk [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ], although this did not reach statistical significance. This trend is consistent with other studies demonstrating an association between early cranioplasty and improved outcomes across several measures [
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ,
      • Bender A.
      • Heulin S.
      • Röhrer S.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty may improve outcome in neurological patients with decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. One study explored the effect of cranioplasty timing on risk of complications in a mixed pathology cohort [
      • Gooch M.R.
      • Gin G.E.
      • Kenning T.J.
      • et al.
      Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy: analysis of 62 cases.
      ]. They demonstrated that risk of complications was maximal when cranioplasty was performed between 100–136 days following DC and fell after this timepoint. However, only one patient in this series suffered from PCS, experiencing status epilepticus after receiving the cranioplasty within 30 days of DC [
      • Gooch M.R.
      • Gin G.E.
      • Kenning T.J.
      • et al.
      Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy: analysis of 62 cases.
      ]. In contrast, a meta-analysis demonstrated no significant association between the length of delay prior to cranioplasty and the risk of PCS in patients with mixed underlying pathology [
      • Malcolm J.G.
      • Rindler R.S.
      • Chu J.K.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty and relationship to timing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
      ]. Further studies are required to evaluate the relationship between DC-cranioplasty interval and risk of PCS in TBI patients.

      4.5 Cranioplasty implant material

      There are now a large variety of materials available for cranioplasty, including autologous bone, titanium sheet/mesh, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). However, the benefits and risks associated with use of different materials in the TBI cohort remain to be evaluated. Four of the eight included studies performed cranioplasties with varying materials [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ,
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ,
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ,
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ]. None of these studies assessed the risk of post-cranioplasty complications with respect to implant material used. One study compared manually and computer-shaped titanium implants with respect to post cranioplasty complications [
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ]. There was no significant difference in PCS incidence between groups. The effect of implant material on post-cranioplasty complications is explored more extensively in the literature in the context of various underlying pathologies. Despite significant differences being observed in terms of risk of post-operative infection [
      • Shah A.M.
      • Jung H.
      • Skirboll S.
      Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis.
      ], differences in risk of PCS have not been demonstrated [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Morrison D.A.
      • Ho K.M.
      • et al.
      A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • Starke R.M.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
      ,
      • Krause-Titz U.R.
      • Warneke N.
      • Freitag-Wolf S.
      • et al.
      Factors influencing the outcome (GOS) in reconstructive cranioplasty.
      ,
      • Thien A.
      • King N.K.K.
      • Ang B.T.
      • et al.
      Comparison of polyetheretherketone and titanium cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy.
      ].

      4.6 Infection

      Current evidence demonstrates a possible role for infection as a risk factor for PCS in mixed pathologies [
      • Zanaty M.
      • Chalouhi N.
      • Starke R.M.
      • et al.
      Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
      ]. Of included studies, one study explored the relationship between infection at the cranioplasty site and PCS risk. Results demonstrated an adjusted OR 3.0, but failed to reach statistical significance on multivariate analysis. Hence, further studies are required to evaluate the effect of infection on PCS in TBI.

      4.7 Timing of seizures

      Only one included study detailed the timing of PCS in relation to the cranioplasty [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. Their data demonstrates a bimodal distribution of PCS, with one peak in the first 24 h and a second at over a week after cranioplasty, with less than 20% of the total occurring in the interim. Delayed cranioplasty particularly increased risk of ‘immediate’ and ‘early’ seizures (<24 h and 24 h to seven days, respectively), though the statistical significance of this observation was not reported [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ]. A study of PCS in 174 patients with mixed pathology found that over 70% of PCS occurs within the first week after cranioplasty [
      • Mukherjee S.
      • Thakur B.
      • Haq I.
      • et al.
      Complications of titanium cranioplasty - a retrospective analysis of 174 patients.
      ], but another found no such difference in incidence either side of a two-week cut off in 200 patients [
      • Liang S.
      • Ding P.
      • Zhang S.
      • et al.
      Prophylactic levetiracetam for seizure control after cranioplasty: a multicenter prospective controlled study.
      ]. Further studies are required to fully understand the distribution of seizure timing after cranioplasty. Standardised definitions of ‘early’ and ‘late onset seizures will help meaningful data comparison.

      4.8 Use of anti-seizures medication

      None of the included studies evaluated the efficacy of anti-seizures medications in preventing PCS. In most studies, it was not reported whether patients were routinely given prophylaxis. Recent evidence in cohorts with mixed pathology suggests that prophylactic levetiracetam can significantly reduce the incidence of PCS [
      • Liang S.
      • Ding P.
      • Zhang S.
      • et al.
      Prophylactic levetiracetam for seizure control after cranioplasty: a multicenter prospective controlled study.
      ]. Whether this applies for TBI remains to be elucidated.

      4.9 Limitations

      This systematic review is limited by (i) the paucity of studies evaluating PCS following TBI, and (ii) an even more limited number of studies exploring risk factors of PCS. Included studies represent patients from wide-ranging locations, namely Australia [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ], India [
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ], China [
      • Wang H.
      • Zhang K.
      • Cao H.
      • et al.
      Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
      ,
      • Luo J.
      • Liu B.
      • Xie Z.
      • et al.
      Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
      ,
      • Zhang G.L.
      • Yang W.Z.
      • Jiang Y.W.
      • et al.
      Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
      ], Missouri [
      • Pierson M.
      • Birinyi P.V.
      • Bhimireddy S.
      • et al.
      Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
      ] and the UK [
      • Broughton E.
      • Pobereskin L.
      • Whitfield P.C.
      Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
      ], in addition to one paper reporting on a military cohort from the US army [
      • Stephens F.L.
      • Mossop C.M.
      • Bell R.S.
      • et al.
      Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
      ]. Varying treatment practices and mechanisms of trauma may affect generalisability of our findings. Furthermore, level of evidence is uniformly low. Only one study was of prospective design, but had a small sample size and follow-up for only one month post-cranioplasty [
      • Songara A.
      • Gupta R.
      • Jain N.
      • et al.
      Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
      ]. Other studies demonstrate that this interval is insufficient for detecting the total incidence of PCS [
      • Honeybul S.
      • Ho K.M.
      Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
      ]. This prevents the differentiation between seizures as an isolated event following cranioplasty and a new diagnosis of epilepsy in included studies.

      4.10 Conclusions and future research

      Our review is the first of its type in the literature to systematically appraise the literature and identify risk factors of PCS in TBI patients. We herein report increasing age, contusion at the cranioplasty site, use of monopolar diathermy and use of autologous fascia at duraplasty as potentially significant risk factors. Further large, prospective cohort studies are required to evaluate (i) the true incidence of PCS; (ii) whether delayed cranioplasty is truly predictive of PCS; and (iii) the validity of potential risk factors identified thus far. Finally, randomised controlled trials are required to assess whether prophylactic administration of antiepileptics is beneficial in reducing the risk of PCS in TBI patients.

      Ethical approval

      We confirm that we have read the Journal’s position on issues involved in ethical publication and affirm that this report is consistent with those guidelines. All co-authors have seen and approved this version of the submission and will see and prove the final version for publication if necessary.

      Declaration of interest

      Authors report no conflict of interest.

      Funding

      This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

      References

        • Jordan B.D.
        The clinical spectrum of sport-related traumatic brain injury.
        Nat Rev Neurol. 2013; 9: 222-230
        • Ferguson P.L.
        • Smith G.M.
        • Wannamaker B.B.
        • et al.
        A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury.
        Epilepsia. 2010; 51: 891-898
        • Honeybul S.
        • Ho K.M.
        Long-term complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
        J Neurotrauma. 2011; 28: 929-935
        • Stephens F.L.
        • Mossop C.M.
        • Bell R.S.
        • et al.
        Cranioplasty complications following wartime decompressive craniectomy.
        Neurosurg Focus. 2010; 28: E3
        • Rosenthal G.
        • Ng I.
        • Moscovici S.
        • et al.
        Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large cranial defects: a 3-center experience.
        Neurosurgery. 2014; 75 (discussion 528-529): 523-529
        • Daou B.
        • Zanaty M.
        • Chalouhi N.
        • et al.
        Low incidence of bone flap resorption after native bone cranioplasty in adults.
        World Neurosurg. 2016; 92: 89-94
        • Piazza M.
        • Grady M.S.
        Cranioplasty.
        Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2017; 28: 257-265
        • Honeybul S.
        • Morrison D.A.
        • Ho K.M.
        • et al.
        A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty.
        J Neurosurg. 2017; 126: 81-90
        • Shah A.M.
        • Jung H.
        • Skirboll S.
        Materials used in cranioplasty: a history and analysis.
        Neurosurg Focus. 2014; 36: E19
        • Honeybul S.
        • Morrison D.A.
        • Ho K.M.
        • et al.
        A randomised controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty: long-term follow-up.
        Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018; 160: 885-891
        • Malcolm J.G.
        • Rindler R.S.
        • Chu J.K.
        • et al.
        Complications following cranioplasty and relationship to timing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        J Clin Neurosci. 2016; 33: 39-51
        • Honeybul S.
        Complications of decompressive craniectomy for head injury.
        J Clin Neurosci. 2010; 17: 430-435
        • Temkin N.R.
        Risk factors for posttraumatic seizures in adults.
        Epilepsia. 2003; 44: 18-20
        • Wang H.
        • Zhang K.
        • Cao H.
        • et al.
        Seizure after cranioplasty: incidence and risk factors.
        J Craniofac Surg. 2017; 28: e560-e564
        • Mukherjee S.
        • Thakur B.
        • Haq I.
        • et al.
        Complications of titanium cranioplasty - a retrospective analysis of 174 patients.
        Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2014; 156: 989-998
        • Liang S.
        • Ding P.
        • Zhang S.
        • et al.
        Prophylactic levetiracetam for seizure control after cranioplasty: a multicenter prospective controlled study.
        World Neurosurg. 2017; 102: 284-292
        • Zanaty M.
        • Chalouhi N.
        • Starke R.M.
        • et al.
        Complications following cranioplasty: incidence and predictors in 348 cases.
        J Neurosurg. 2016; 123: 182-188
        • Pierson M.
        • Birinyi P.V.
        • Bhimireddy S.
        • et al.
        Analysis of decompressive craniectomies with subsequent cranioplasties in the presence of collagen matrix dural substitute and polytetrafluoroethylene as an adhesion preventative material.
        World Neurosurg. 2016; 86: 153-160
        • Moher D.
        • Liberati A.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • et al.
        Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        BMJ. 2009; 339: b2535
        • Wallace B.
        • Dahebreh I.
        • Trikalinos T.
        • et al.
        Closing the gap between methodologists and end-users: R as a computational back-end.
        Journal of Statistical Software. 2012; 49: 1-15
        • Sterne J.A.
        • Hernán M.A.
        • Reeves B.C.
        • et al.
        ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.
        BMJ. 2016; 355: i4919
        • OLoEW Group’
        The Oxford levels of evidence 2.
        Book the Oxford levels of evidence 2. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, 2011
        • Honeybul S.
        • Ho K.M.
        Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome.
        Injury. 2014; 45: 1332-1339
        • Luo J.
        • Liu B.
        • Xie Z.
        • et al.
        Comparison of manually shaped and computer-shaped titanium mesh for repairing large frontotemporoparietal skull defects after traumatic brain injury.
        Neurosurg Focus. 2012; 33: E13
        • Zhang G.L.
        • Yang W.Z.
        • Jiang Y.W.
        • et al.
        Extensive duraplasty with autologous graft in decompressive craniectomy and subsequent early cranioplasty for severe head trauma.
        Chinese Journal of Traumatology - English Edition. 2010; 13: 259-264
        • Broughton E.
        • Pobereskin L.
        • Whitfield P.C.
        Seven years of cranioplasty in a regional neurosurgical centre.
        Br J Neurosurg. 2014; 28: 34-39
        • Songara A.
        • Gupta R.
        • Jain N.
        • et al.
        Early cranioplasty in patients with posttraumatic decompressive craniectomy and its correlation with changes in cerebral perfusion parameters and neurocognitive outcome.
        World Neurosurgery. 2016; 94: 303-308
        • Chen F.
        • Duan Y.
        • Li Y.
        • et al.
        Use of an antiepileptic drug to control epileptic seizures associated with cranioplasty: a randomized controlled trial.
        Int J Surg. 2017; 40: 113-116
        • Bender A.
        • Heulin S.
        • Röhrer S.
        • et al.
        Early cranioplasty may improve outcome in neurological patients with decompressive craniectomy.
        Brain Inj. 2013; 27: 1073-1079
        • Chibbaro S.
        • Di Rocco F.
        • Mirone G.
        • et al.
        Decompressive craniectomy and early cranioplasty for the management of severe head injury: a prospective multicenter study on 147 patients.
        World Neurosurg. 2011; 75: 558-562
        • Sobani Z.A.
        • Shamim M.S.
        • Zafar S.N.
        • et al.
        Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: an institutional audit and analysis of factors related to complications.
        Surg Neurol Int. 2011; 2: 123
        • Höhne J.
        • Werzmirzowsky K.
        • Ott C.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of cranioplasty with preformed titanium versus freehand molded polymethylmethacrylate implants.
        J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2018; 79: 200-205
        • Schuss P.
        • Vatter H.
        • Marquardt G.
        • et al.
        Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: the effect of timing on postoperative complications.
        J Neurotrauma. 2012; 29: 1090-1095
        • Faul M.
        • Xu L.
        • Wald M.
        • et al.
        Traumatic brain injury in the United States.
        Natl Cent Inj Prev Control. 2010;
        • Chang V.
        • Hartzfeld P.
        • Langlois M.
        • et al.
        Outcomes of cranial repair after craniectomy.
        J Neurosurg. 2010; 112: 1120-1124
        • Creutzfeldt C.J.
        • Tirschwell D.L.
        • Kim L.J.
        • et al.
        Seizures after decompressive hemicraniectomy for ischaemic stroke.
        J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014; 85: 721-725
        • Lee L.
        • Ker J.
        • Quah B.L.
        • et al.
        A retrospective analysis and review of an institution’s experience with the complications of cranioplasty.
        Br J Neurosurg. 2013; 27: 629-635
        • Riascos D.
        • Buriticá E.
        • Jiménez E.
        • et al.
        Neurodegenerative diversity in human cortical contusion: histological analysis of tissue derived from decompressive craniectomy.
        Brain Res. 2013; 1537: 86-99
        • Gooch M.R.
        • Gin G.E.
        • Kenning T.J.
        • et al.
        Complications of cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy: analysis of 62 cases.
        Neurosurg Focus. 2009; 26: E9
        • Krause-Titz U.R.
        • Warneke N.
        • Freitag-Wolf S.
        • et al.
        Factors influencing the outcome (GOS) in reconstructive cranioplasty.
        Neurosurg Rev. 2016; 39: 133-139
        • Thien A.
        • King N.K.K.
        • Ang B.T.
        • et al.
        Comparison of polyetheretherketone and titanium cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy.
        World Neurosurg. 2015; 83: 176-180