• Daniel Azzam, Prasanth Romiyo, Thien Nguyen, John P Sheppard, Yasmine Alkhalid, Carlito Lagman, Giyarpuram N Prashant, and Isaac Yang.
• Department of Neurosurgery, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center of the University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
• World Neurosurg. 2018 May 1; 113: 244-248.

ObjectiveDuraplasty, a common neurosurgical intervention, involves synthetic or biological graft placement to ensure dural closure. The objective of this study is to advance our understanding of the use of dural substitutes in cranial surgery.MethodsThe PubMed database was systematically searched to identify studies published over the past decade (2007-2017) that described duraplasty procedures. Clinical data were disaggregated and analyzed for the comparisons of biological versus synthetic grafts.ResultsA total of 462 cases were included in the quantitative synthesis. Overall, the most common indication for duraplasty was tumor resection (53%). Allografts were more frequently used in decompression for Chiari malformations compared with xenografts and synthetic grafts (P < 0.001). Xenografts were more frequently used in decompressive hemicraniectomy procedures for evacuation of acute subdural hematomas over allografts and synthetics (P < 0.001). Synthetic grafts were more frequently used in tumor cases than biological grafts (P = 0.002). The cumulative complication rate for dural substitutes of all types was 11%. There were no significant differences in complication rates among the 3 types of dural substitutes.ConclusionsDural substitutes are commonly used to ensure dural closure in a variety of cranial procedures. This study provides greater insight into duraplasty practices and highlights the moderate complication rate associated with the procedure. Future studies are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of such procedures in larger prospective cohorts.Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

21 keywords...

hide…