Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Research, Society and Development |
Texto Completo: | https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/30483 |
Resumo: | This study aimed to describe the infectious risks of using autologous bone and PMMA in cranioplasty. This is an integrative literature review of a qualitative and descriptive nature. The bibliographic survey was carried out in March and April 2022 by searching the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Virtual Health Library (BVS), Public Medline (PubMed) and Science Direct databases and libraries. The inclusion criteria for the selection of studies were: articles published in full between the years 2013 to 2022, in English. The exclusion criteria were: monographs, dissertations, theses, Course Conclusion Papers (TCC), publications in annals of events, literature reviews and duplicate articles in one or more databases. By analyzing the articles included in this review, some authors consider that there are no significant differences regarding the infectious risk in the use of PMMA prosthesis and autologous bone, as raw material for cranioplasty. One study evaluated the impact of using antibiotics in PMMA prostheses in cranioplasty with moderate to large defects. Another study analyzed the use of prefabricated and pre-sterilized PMMA as cranioplasty material in the Indian population. One study says that prior craniotomy and PMMA cranioplasty were associated with a higher rate of postoperative infection. In another article, cranial reconstruction with autologous bone presented greater complications. The use of PMMA in cranioplasty compared to autologous bone has different outcomes in the literature. |
id |
UNIFEI_ba7234d8cfc28188649220b14e2f0855 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/30483 |
network_acronym_str |
UNIFEI |
network_name_str |
Research, Society and Development |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous boneRiesgo infeccioso del uso de biomateriales para craneoplastia: polimetilmetacrilato vs. hueso autólogoRisco infeccioso do uso de biomateriais para cranioplastia: polimetilmetacrilato vs. osso autólogoPMMAPolimetilmetacrilatoInfecçãoNeurocirurgiaEnsino em saúde.PMMAPolymethylmethacrylateInfectionNeurosurgeryHealth teaching.PMMAPolimetacrilato de metiloInfecciónNeurocirugíaEnseñanza en salud.This study aimed to describe the infectious risks of using autologous bone and PMMA in cranioplasty. This is an integrative literature review of a qualitative and descriptive nature. The bibliographic survey was carried out in March and April 2022 by searching the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Virtual Health Library (BVS), Public Medline (PubMed) and Science Direct databases and libraries. The inclusion criteria for the selection of studies were: articles published in full between the years 2013 to 2022, in English. The exclusion criteria were: monographs, dissertations, theses, Course Conclusion Papers (TCC), publications in annals of events, literature reviews and duplicate articles in one or more databases. By analyzing the articles included in this review, some authors consider that there are no significant differences regarding the infectious risk in the use of PMMA prosthesis and autologous bone, as raw material for cranioplasty. One study evaluated the impact of using antibiotics in PMMA prostheses in cranioplasty with moderate to large defects. Another study analyzed the use of prefabricated and pre-sterilized PMMA as cranioplasty material in the Indian population. One study says that prior craniotomy and PMMA cranioplasty were associated with a higher rate of postoperative infection. In another article, cranial reconstruction with autologous bone presented greater complications. The use of PMMA in cranioplasty compared to autologous bone has different outcomes in the literature.Este estudio tuvo como objetivo describir los riesgos infecciosos del uso de hueso autólogo y PMMA en craneoplastia. Se trata de una revisión integrativa de la literatura de carácter cualitativo y descriptivo. El levantamiento bibliográfico se realizó en marzo y abril de 2022 mediante la búsqueda en las bases de datos y bibliotecas Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Virtual Health Library (BVS), Public Medline (PubMed) y Science Direct. Los criterios de inclusión para la selección de estudios fueron: artículos publicados íntegramente entre los años 2013 a 2022, en idioma inglés. Los criterios de exclusión fueron: monografías, disertaciones, tesis, Course Conclusion Papers (TCC), publicaciones en anales de eventos, revisiones de literatura y artículos duplicados en una o más bases de datos. Al analizar los artículos incluidos en esta revisión, algunos autores consideran que no existen diferencias significativas en relación al riesgo infeccioso en el uso de prótesis de PMMA y hueso autólogo, como materia prima para la craneoplastia. Un estudio evaluó el impacto del uso de antibióticos en prótesis de PMMA en craneoplastia con defectos moderados a grandes. Otro estudio analizó el uso de PMMA prefabricado y preesterilizado como material de craneoplastia en población india. Un estudio dice que la craneotomía previa y la craneoplastia con PMMA se asociaron con una mayor tasa de infección posoperatoria. En otro artículo, la reconstrucción craneal con hueso autólogo presentó mayores complicaciones. El uso de PMMA en craneoplastia en comparación con hueso autólogo tiene diferentes resultados en la literatura.Este estudo objetivou descrever os riscos infecciosos do uso de osso autólogo e PMMA na cranioplastia. Trata-se de uma revisão integrativa da literatura de natureza qualitativa e caráter descritivo. O levantamento bibliográfico foi executado no mês de março e abril de 2022 mediante busca nas bases e bibliotecas de dados da Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS), Public Medline (PubMed) e Science Direct. Os critérios de inclusão para seleção dos estudos foram: artigos publicados na íntegra entre os anos de 2013 a 2022, no idioma inglês. Como critérios de exclusão foram: monografias, dissertações, teses, Trabalhos de Conclusão de Curso (TCC), publicações em anais de eventos, revisões de literatura e artigos duplicados em uma ou mais bases de dados. Mediante análise dos artigos inclusos nesta revisão, alguns autores ponderam que não há diferenças significativas em relação ao risco infeccioso no uso da prótese de PMMA e do osso autólogo, como matéria-prima da cranioplastia. Um estudo avaliou o impacto do uso de antibióticos em próteses de PMMA na cranioplastia com defeitos moderados a grandes. Já outro estudo, analisou o uso de PMMA pré-fabricado e pré-esterilizado como material de cranioplastia na população indiana. Um estudo diz que a craniotomia prévia e a cranioplastia com PMMA foram associadas à maior taxa de infecção pós-operatória. Em outro artigo, a reconstrução craniana com osso autólogo apresentou maiores complicações. O uso de PMMA na cranioplastia comparado ao osso autólogo apresenta desfechos diferentes na literatura.Research, Society and Development2022-06-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/3048310.33448/rsd-v11i8.30483Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 No. 8; e0511830483Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 Núm. 8; e0511830483Research, Society and Development; v. 11 n. 8; e05118304832525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIporhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/30483/26214Copyright (c) 2022 Lucas Santos Souza; Ainatna Adgena de Carvalho Santos; João Victor de Andrade Carvalho; Amanda Gomes Lima Bezerra; Alexia Morgana Santos Sales; Marco Antonio Silva Robles; Luciana Montalvão Gois Figueiredo de Almeida; Maria Clara da Silva Castro; Nathan Correia Freire; Bruno Fernandes de Oliveira Santoshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSouza, Lucas SantosSantos, Ainatna Adgena de CarvalhoCarvalho, João Victor de Andrade Bezerra, Amanda Gomes Lima Sales, Alexia Morgana Santos Robles, Marco Antonio SilvaAlmeida, Luciana Montalvão Gois Figueiredo de Castro, Maria Clara da Silva Freire, Nathan Correia Santos, Bruno Fernandes de Oliveira 2022-07-01T13:34:06Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/30483Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:47:13.093730Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone Riesgo infeccioso del uso de biomateriales para craneoplastia: polimetilmetacrilato vs. hueso autólogo Risco infeccioso do uso de biomateriais para cranioplastia: polimetilmetacrilato vs. osso autólogo |
title |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
spellingShingle |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone Souza, Lucas Santos PMMA Polimetilmetacrilato Infecção Neurocirurgia Ensino em saúde. PMMA Polymethylmethacrylate Infection Neurosurgery Health teaching. PMMA Polimetacrilato de metilo Infección Neurocirugía Enseñanza en salud. |
title_short |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
title_full |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
title_fullStr |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
title_full_unstemmed |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
title_sort |
Infectious risk of using biomaterials for cranioplasty: polymethylmethacrylate vs. autologous bone |
author |
Souza, Lucas Santos |
author_facet |
Souza, Lucas Santos Santos, Ainatna Adgena de Carvalho Carvalho, João Victor de Andrade Bezerra, Amanda Gomes Lima Sales, Alexia Morgana Santos Robles, Marco Antonio Silva Almeida, Luciana Montalvão Gois Figueiredo de Castro, Maria Clara da Silva Freire, Nathan Correia Santos, Bruno Fernandes de Oliveira |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Santos, Ainatna Adgena de Carvalho Carvalho, João Victor de Andrade Bezerra, Amanda Gomes Lima Sales, Alexia Morgana Santos Robles, Marco Antonio Silva Almeida, Luciana Montalvão Gois Figueiredo de Castro, Maria Clara da Silva Freire, Nathan Correia Santos, Bruno Fernandes de Oliveira |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Souza, Lucas Santos Santos, Ainatna Adgena de Carvalho Carvalho, João Victor de Andrade Bezerra, Amanda Gomes Lima Sales, Alexia Morgana Santos Robles, Marco Antonio Silva Almeida, Luciana Montalvão Gois Figueiredo de Castro, Maria Clara da Silva Freire, Nathan Correia Santos, Bruno Fernandes de Oliveira |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
PMMA Polimetilmetacrilato Infecção Neurocirurgia Ensino em saúde. PMMA Polymethylmethacrylate Infection Neurosurgery Health teaching. PMMA Polimetacrilato de metilo Infección Neurocirugía Enseñanza en salud. |
topic |
PMMA Polimetilmetacrilato Infecção Neurocirurgia Ensino em saúde. PMMA Polymethylmethacrylate Infection Neurosurgery Health teaching. PMMA Polimetacrilato de metilo Infección Neurocirugía Enseñanza en salud. |
description |
This study aimed to describe the infectious risks of using autologous bone and PMMA in cranioplasty. This is an integrative literature review of a qualitative and descriptive nature. The bibliographic survey was carried out in March and April 2022 by searching the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Virtual Health Library (BVS), Public Medline (PubMed) and Science Direct databases and libraries. The inclusion criteria for the selection of studies were: articles published in full between the years 2013 to 2022, in English. The exclusion criteria were: monographs, dissertations, theses, Course Conclusion Papers (TCC), publications in annals of events, literature reviews and duplicate articles in one or more databases. By analyzing the articles included in this review, some authors consider that there are no significant differences regarding the infectious risk in the use of PMMA prosthesis and autologous bone, as raw material for cranioplasty. One study evaluated the impact of using antibiotics in PMMA prostheses in cranioplasty with moderate to large defects. Another study analyzed the use of prefabricated and pre-sterilized PMMA as cranioplasty material in the Indian population. One study says that prior craniotomy and PMMA cranioplasty were associated with a higher rate of postoperative infection. In another article, cranial reconstruction with autologous bone presented greater complications. The use of PMMA in cranioplasty compared to autologous bone has different outcomes in the literature. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-06-06 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/30483 10.33448/rsd-v11i8.30483 |
url |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/30483 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.33448/rsd-v11i8.30483 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/30483/26214 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 No. 8; e0511830483 Research, Society and Development; Vol. 11 Núm. 8; e0511830483 Research, Society and Development; v. 11 n. 8; e0511830483 2525-3409 reponame:Research, Society and Development instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) instacron:UNIFEI |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
instacron_str |
UNIFEI |
institution |
UNIFEI |
reponame_str |
Research, Society and Development |
collection |
Research, Society and Development |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
rsd.articles@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1797052714263248896 |