ArticleCureus2021
Characterizing Adverse Events of Cranioplasty Implants After Craniectomy: A Retrospective Review of the Federal Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Displacement of synthetic cranioplasty implant due to mechanical failure of titanium fixation plating: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
- Volumetric changes in the bone flap at one year follow up in patients undergoing craniotomy.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Low-Cost Cranioplasty-A Systematic Review of 3D Printing in Medicine.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Approaches to Biofunctionalize Polyetheretherketone for Antibacterial: A Review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Cranioplasty is performed by placing an artificial plate in place of a patient's native skull bones to repair post-craniectomy defects after trauma. Implanted materials can range from titanium to synthetic polyether derivatives and are produced by multiple manufacturers. There are few studies characterizing complications associated with these cranioplasty plates to date. We aimed to quantify and categorize complications of these devices using a national federal database. Methods The Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database was queried for all entries reported under the category "plate, cranioplasty, preformed, non-alterable" with the additional product code GXN between the time range from September 1, 2010, to September 1, 2020. After data extraction, each of the entries was screened for duplicates and tabulated into different categories of complications. Additionally, product information such as the plate manufacturer was extracted from each entry. Results The search yielded 329 unique event reports. The most frequent complications were infection (39%), followed by incorrectly fitting implants (30%) and implant breaks (6%). Other major complications included cerebrospinal fluid leakage and cerebral edema (5%), wound dehiscence (5%), and migration of hardware (3%). The brands associated with the most entries in the database were the Synthes (DePuy Synthes Companies, Massachusetts, United States) polyetheretherketone (PEEK) patient-specific implants (PSI) (57%), the Biomet (Zimmer Biome, Indiana, United States) hard tissue replacement-polyetherketoneketone (HTR-PEKK) patient-matched implant (PMI) (23%), and the AccuShape PEEK PSI (MedCAD, Dallas, USA) (5%). Conclusions Infection and improperly fitting implants appear to be the two most frequent complications of cranioplasty plates. The goals of future research should include the prevention of plate infections as well as improving techniques to custom-fit implantable devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.