No abstract

No abstract

IntroductionCranioplasty is a common surgery in neurosurgery department. However, restoring the integrity of skull brings many challenges to surgeons, and the selection of ideal implant materials is throughout the history of cranioplasty. Although titanium mesh was still preferred by many neurosurgeons in cranial reconstruction, the new polyetheretherketone (PEEK) material, for example, is gaining popularity for craniofacial reconstruction today. There remain limited data that compare the outcome of PEEK cranioplasty and titanium mesh cranioplasty. It is necessary to conduct a study to compare outcome of different materials for cranioplasty.Methods/designIn this multicentre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled study, we will randomise 140 patients in a 1:1 ratio to PEEK cranioplasty versus titanium cranioplasty. Eligible patients are adults who were diagnosed with cranial defect (due to severe traumatic brain injury, ischaemic stroke, haemorrhagic stroke, infiltrative tumour and so on), the defect size is over 25 cm2, and they need to agree to participate in this trial. Instead of standard examinations, the enrolled patients receive neurological, motor, cognitive function and cerebral hemodynamics examinations as well as cosmetic evaluation. The procedures are repeated 3, 6 months after cranioplasty. The primary outcome, defined as infection or implant exposure after surgery, is the implant failure rate within 6 months. Secondary outcomes include postoperative complication rates, neurological outcomes, motor function, cerebral hemodynamics, cosmetic outcome and the total cost over a 6-month period.Ethics and disseminationThis trial protocol has been approved by Biomedical Research Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University. All patients will be fully informed the implant materials, potential complications after surgery, responsibilities during the trial, and they will sign the informed consent before joining in this trial. If the patient’s cognitive function is impaired, the patient’s next of kin would be carefully informed. The results will be disseminated through academic conferences, student theses and will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trail registration numberChiCTR1900024625; Pre-results.

Introduction: Cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy is routinely performed to restore integrity of skull and improve neurological function. However, reconstructing the cranial defect brings many challenges to neurosurgeons and search for ideal implant materials is one of the most controversial issues. Although many studies have compared the outcomes of titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cranioplasty, yet no prospective study exists to guide the choice of titanium and PEEK materials. Methods/design: A non-randomized, partially blinded, prospective cohort study is described that comprehensively compares the long-term outcomes of titanium cranioplasty versus PEEK cranioplasty. One hundred forty-five patients for each group will be recruited. Eligible patients are those with cranial defect due to traumatic brain injury (≥ 16 years), defect size is over 25 cm 2 and they must agree to participate in the trial. Each participant is evaluated before surgery, on discharge, 3, 6, and 12 months after cranioplasty. The primary outcome is the infection, implant failure and implant deformation requiring revision surgery within 12 months. Secondary outcomes include postoperative complication rate, neurological outcomes, motor function, and cosmetic outcome over a 6-month period. Discussion: Search for ideal implant materials is throughout the history of cranioplasty. This study will provide robust evidence for the choice of cranioplasty materials. Trial registration number: ChiCTR2000033406

No abstract