Page 187 - IJB-9-1

International Journal of Bioprinting PEEK skull implant in cranioplasty

Ethics approval and consent to participate 8. Guzzi EA, Tibbitt MW, 2020, Additive manufacturing of
precision biomaterials. Adv Mater, 32(13): e1901994.
The protocol was approved by the ethics committees and
research boards of the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201901994
Medical University (KY2021133). The consent to release 9. Wang L, Liu X, Jiang T, et al., 2020, Three-dimensional
medical information and the consent to participate in the printed polyether-ether-ketone implant for extensive chest
study were obtained from the subject. wall reconstruction: A case report. Thorac Cancer, 11(9):
2709–2712.
Consent for publication https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.13560
Consent was obtained from the patient for publication of 10. Kang J, Zhang J, Zheng J, et al., 2021, 3D-printed PEEK
this case report and relevant images. implant for mandibular defects repair—A new method.
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 116: 104335.
Availability of data https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2021.104335

Further inquiries regarding the raw data can be directed to 11. Liu C, Xia Z, 2022, Additive manufacturing innovation for
the corresponding author. musculoskeletal tissue repair and regeneration: From bench
to bedside. Biomater Transl, 3(2): 99–101.
References https://doi.org/10.12336/biomatertransl.2022.02.002

1. Ozoner B, 2021, Cranioplasty following severe traumatic 12. Zhang Q, Yuan Y, Li X, et al., 2018, A large multicenter
brain injury: Role in neurorecovery. Curr Neurol Neurosci retrospective research on embedded cranioplasty and
Rep, 21(11): 62. covered cranioplasty. World Neurosurg, 112: e645–e651.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-021-01147-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.114
2. Rosinski CL, Patel S, Geever B, et al., 2020, A retrospective 13. Falland-Cheung L, Waddell J, Li K, et al., 2017, Investigation
comparative analysis of titanium mesh and custom implants of the elastic modulus, tensile and flexural strength of five
for cranioplasty. Neurosurgery, 86(1): E15–E22. skull simulant materials for impact testing of a forensic skin/
skull/brain model. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater, 68: 303–307.
https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyz358
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.02.023
3. Henry J, Amoo M, Taylor J, et al., 2021, Complications of
cranioplasty in relation to material: Systematic review, 14. Alkhaibary A, Alharbi A, Alnefaie N, et al., 2020,
network meta-analysis and meta-regression. Neurosurgery, Cranioplasty: A comprehensive review of the history,
89(3): 383–394. materials, surgical aspects, and complications. World
Neurosurg, 139: 445–452.
https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyab180
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.04.211
4. From the American Association of Neurological Surgeons,
A.S.o.N.C., et al., 2018, Multisociety consensus quality 15. Yang J, Sun T, Yuan Y, et al., 2020, Evaluation of titanium
improvement revised consensus statement for endovascular cranioplasty and polyetheretherketone cranioplasty after
therapy of acute ischemic stroke. Int J Stroke, 13(6): 612–632. decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury: A
prospective, multicenter, non-randomized controlled trial.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493018778713 Medicine (Baltimore), 99(30): e21251.
5. Zhang J, Tian W, Chen J, et al., 2019, The application of https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000021251
polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in cranioplasty. Brain
Res Bull, 153: 143–149. 16. Singh M, Ricci J, Dunn I, et al., 2016, Alloderm covering over
titanium cranioplasty may minimize contour deformities
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2019.08.010 in the frontal bone position. J Craniofac Surg, 27(5): 1292–
6. Rosenthal G, Ng I, Moscovici S, et al., 2014, 1294.
Polyetheretherketone implants for the repair of large https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000002796
cranial defects: A 3-center experience. Neurosurgery, 75(5):
523–529; discussion 528–529. 17. Panayotov IV, Orti V, Cuisinier F, et al., 2016,
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) for medical applications.
https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000477 J Mater Sci Mater Med, 27(7): 118.
7. Alimi OA, Meijboom R, 2021, Current and future trends https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-016-5731-4
of additive manufacturing for chemistry applications: A
review. J Mater Sci, 56(30): 16824–16850. 18. Wang Y, Wang J, Ji Z, et al., 2022, Application of bioprinting
in ophthalmology. Int J Bioprint, 8(2): 552.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06362-7
https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v8i2.552

Volume 9 Issue 1 (2023)olume 9 Issue 1 (2023)
V 179 https://doi.org/10.18063/ijb.v9i1.634