173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25534061)
1. A comparison and cost analysis of cranioplasty techniques: autologous bone versus custom computer-generated implants.
Gilardino MS; Karunanayake M; Al-Humsi T; Izadpanah A; Al-Ajmi H; Marcoux J; Atkinson J; Farmer JP
J Craniofac Surg; 2015 Jan; 26(1):113-7. PubMed ID: 25534061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Analyzing the Cost of Autogenous Cranioplasty Versus Custom-Made Patient-Specific Alloplastic Cranioplasty.
Mrad MA; Murrad K; Antonyshyn O
J Craniofac Surg; 2017 Jul; 28(5):1260-1263. PubMed ID: 28582300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Interval cranioplasty with patient-specific implants and autogenous bone grafts--success and cost analysis.
Lethaus B; Bloebaum M; Koper D; Poort-Ter Laak M; Kessler P
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2014 Dec; 42(8):1948-51. PubMed ID: 25443869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Computer-designed PEEK implants: a peek into the future of cranioplasty?
Ng ZY; Nawaz I
J Craniofac Surg; 2014 Jan; 25(1):e55-8. PubMed ID: 24406603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cranioplasty: indications and advances.
Goldstein JA; Paliga JT; Bartlett SP
Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2013 Aug; 21(4):400-9. PubMed ID: 23770828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Outcomes following polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cranioplasty: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Punchak M; Chung LK; Lagman C; Bui TT; Lazareff J; Rezzadeh K; Jarrahy R; Yang I
J Clin Neurosci; 2017 Jul; 41():30-35. PubMed ID: 28377284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Calvarial reconstruction with polyetheretherketone implants.
Hanasono MM; Goel N; DeMonte F
Ann Plast Surg; 2009 Jun; 62(6):653-5. PubMed ID: 19461279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Computed-tomography modeled polyether ether ketone (PEEK) implants in revision cranioplasty.
O'Reilly EB; Barnett S; Madden C; Welch B; Mickey B; Rozen S
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg; 2015 Mar; 68(3):329-38. PubMed ID: 25541423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Customized polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants are associated with similar hospital length of stay compared to autologous bone used in cranioplasty procedures.
Mozaffari K; Rana S; Chow A; Mahgerefteh N; Duong C; Sheppard JP; Phillips HW; Jarrahy R; Yang I
J Neurol Sci; 2022 Mar; 434():120169. PubMed ID: 35134672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison between autologous bone grafts and acrylic (PMMA) implants - A retrospective analysis of 286 cranioplasty procedures.
Vince GH; Kraschl J; Rauter H; Stein M; Grossauer S; Uhl E
J Clin Neurosci; 2019 Mar; 61():205-209. PubMed ID: 30396817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Custom porous polyethylene implants for large-scale pediatric skull reconstruction: early outcomes.
Lin AY; Kinsella CR; Rottgers SA; Smith DM; Grunwaldt LJ; Cooper GM; Losee JE
J Craniofac Surg; 2012 Jan; 23(1):67-70. PubMed ID: 22337376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Outcomes and Complications of Pediatric Cranioplasty: A Systematic Review.
Abu-Ghname A; Banuelos J; Oliver JD; Vyas K; Daniels D; Sharaf B
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2019 Sep; 144(3):433e-443e. PubMed ID: 31461029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Patient-specific implants compared with stored bone grafts for patients with interval cranioplasty.
Lethaus B; Bloebaum M; Essers B; ter Laak MP; Steiner T; Kessler P
J Craniofac Surg; 2014 Jan; 25(1):206-9. PubMed ID: 24406579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of Autogenous and Alloplastic Cranioplasty Materials Following Impact Testing.
Wallace RD; Salt C; Konofaos P
J Craniofac Surg; 2015 Jul; 26(5):1551-7. PubMed ID: 26114508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Autologous bone flap versus hydroxyapatite prosthesis in first intention in secondary cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: a French medico-economical study.
Lemée JM; Petit D; Splingard M; Menei P
Neurochirurgie; 2013 Apr; 59(2):60-3. PubMed ID: 23414773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of Perioperative and Long-term Outcomes Following PEEK and Autologous Cranioplasty: A Single Institution Experience and Review of the Literature.
Anderson B; Harris P; Mozaffari K; Foster CH; Johnson M; Jaco AA; Rosner MK
World Neurosurg; 2023 Dec; 180():e127-e134. PubMed ID: 37683922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Single-step resection and reconstruction using patient-specific implants in the treatment of benign cranio-orbital tumors.
Gerbino G; Bianchi FA; Zavattero E; Tartara F; Garbossa D; Ducati A
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Nov; 71(11):1969-82. PubMed ID: 23676776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [First Experience with Cranioplasty Using the Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Implant - Retrospective Five-Year Follow-up Study].
Šámal F; Ouzký M; Strnad J; Haninec P; Linzer P; Filip M
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2019; 86(6):431-434. PubMed ID: 31941571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cranioplasties following craniectomies in children-a multicenter, retrospective cohort study.
Klieverik VM; Miller KJ; Han KS; Singhal A; Vassilyadi M; Touchette CJ; Weil AG; Woerdeman PA
Childs Nerv Syst; 2019 Sep; 35(9):1473-1480. PubMed ID: 30554262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Autologous Bone Cranioplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis of Frozen and Subcutaneous Bone Flap Storage Methods.
Rosinski CL; Chaker AN; Zakrzewski J; Geever B; Patel S; Chiu RG; Rosenberg DM; Parola R; Shah K; Behbahani M; Mehta AI
World Neurosurg; 2019 Nov; 131():e312-e320. PubMed ID: 31351936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
