Atormac
brintellex
Neurology India
menu-bar5 Open access journal indexed with Index Medicus
  Users online: 2082  
 Home | Login 
About Editorial board Articlesmenu-bullet NSI Publicationsmenu-bullet Search Instructions Online Submission Subscribe Videos Etcetera Contact
  Navigate Here 
 »   Next article
 »   Previous article
 »   Table of Contents

 Resource Links
 »   Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
 »   Citation Manager
 »   Access Statistics
 »   Reader Comments
 »   Email Alert *
 »   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed4972    
    Printed112    
    Emailed2    
    PDF Downloaded115    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal

 

 BRIEF REPORT
Year : 2010  |  Volume : 58  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 634--636

Bony reconstruction by reposition of bony chips in suboccipital craniectomy


1 Department of Neurosurgery, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh
2 Department of Neurosurgery, K.E.M. Hospital and Seth G.S. Medical College, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, Bangladesh

Correspondence Address:
Forhad Hossain Chowdhury
Department of Neurosurgery, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, 32 Bokshibazar, Dhaka-1200
Bangladesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.68682

Rights and Permissions

In suboccipital craniectomy where the bone is not repositioned, there may be a significant cosmetic defect due to lack of skull bone in the suboccipital region. It may accompanied by sensory symptoms, including pain. To prevent any cosmetic defect and sensory symptoms we repositioned the bone chips at the craniectomy site in 42 suboccipital craniectomies before the closure of the scalp. At a mean follow-up of 22 months (range: 5-44 months), two patients complained of mild discomfort in the healed wound or of occasional local pain. One patient complained of mild itching at the site. In two patients, bone chips were accumulated at the lower part of the suboccipital craniectomy and failed to form a uniform bone cover at the operated site. In one patient, all bone chips were reabsorbed and there was no bone at the operated site. There was pseudomeningocele formation in one patient. In the rest of the cases there was satisfactory bone coverage at the operated site, both clinically and radiologically. The wound sites were aesthetically acceptable in 40 cases. Our study suggests that in the majority of cases where suboccipital craniotomy is not possible or not done, repositioning of the bone chips at the craniectomy site is associated with satisfactory aesthetic and functional outcome and formation of bone coverage at the operated site.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article

Online since 20th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow