ArticleNeurotrauma reports2022
Ultra-Early Cranioplasty versus Conventional Cranioplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study at an Academic Level 1 Trauma Center.
Article in Neurotrauma reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06632587 (Comparing Outcomes Between Early and Standard-of-care Delayed Cranioplasty After Decompressive Hemicraniectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Comparing Outcomes Between Early and Standard-of-care Delayed Cranioplasty After Decompressive Hemicraniectomy
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Early Versus Delayed Cranioplasty After Decompressive Craniectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Optimal timing of cranioplasty post-decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and overview of ongoing trials.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Pooled it
- The timing of cranioplasty and the risk of postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Hemispheric asymmetry and its influence on cranioplasty complications after decompressive craniectomy.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Single-center experience with ultra-early cranioplasty within 3 weeks after decompressive craniectomy.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The goal of this study was to ascertain the efficacy, safety, and comparability of ultra-early cranioplasty (CP; defined here as <30 days from the original craniectomy) to conventional cranioplasty (defined here as >30 days from the original craniectomy). A retrospective review of CPs performed at our institution between January 2016 and July 2020 was performed. Craniectomies initially performed at other institutions were excluded. Seventy-seven CPs were included in our study. Ultra-early CP was defined as CP performed within 30 days of craniectomy whereas conventional CP occurred after 30 days. Post-operative wound infection rates, rate of return to the operating room (OR) with or without bone flap removal, operative length, and rate of post-CP hydrocephalus were compared between the two groups. Thirty-nine and 38 patients were included in the ultra-early and conventional CP groups, respectively. The average number of days to CP in the ultra-early group was 17.70 ± 7.75 days compared to 95.70 ± 65.60 days in the conventional group. The mean Glasgow Coma Scale upon arrival to the emergency room was 7.28 ± 3.90 and 6.92 ± 4.14 for the ultra-early and conventional groups, respectively. The operative time was shorter in the ultra-early cohort than that in the conventional cohort (ultra-early, 2.40 ± 0.71 h; conventional, 3.00 ± 1.63 h;
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.