Three-dimensional cranioplasty with polyetheretherketone (PEEK): a case report
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59156/74rypa85Keywords:
Cranioplasty, Neurosurgery, PEEK implant, Traumatic brain injuryAbstract
Background: cranioplasty is a fundamental procedure for cerebral protection and for restoring the anatomical and functional integrity of the cranial vault. In recent years, several studies have suggested that patient-specific polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants may offer advantages over other materials, including accurate anatomical adaptation, satisfactory aesthetic outcomes, and a favorable safety profile.
Objectives: to report a clinical case of cranioplasty using a prefabricated PEEK implant and to describe the patient’s clinical and functional outcomes.
Case description: 23-year-old male patient with a history of severe traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy. During follow-up, he developed a residual right parietotemporal skull defect associated with sinking of the skin flap, without evidence of active intracranial lesions, and with preserved neurological and functional status at the time of preoperative evaluation.
Surgery: a right-sided cranioplasty with a prefabricated PEEK implant was performed without intraoperative complications. The postoperative course was uneventful, with satisfactory clinical evolution and good implant tolerance.
Conclusion: patient-specific cranioplasty with PEEK proved to be a viable and effective option for cranial defect reconstruction in this case, achieving favorable clinical and aesthetic outcomes.
Downloads
References
1. Ozone B. Cranioplasty following severe traumatic brain injury: role in neurorecovery. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2021;21(11):62. Published 2021 Oct 21. Doi: 10.1007/s11910-021-01147-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-021-01147-6
2. Rynkowski CB, Robba C, Loreto M, Wickert Theisen AC, Kolia AG, Finger G, y col. Effects of cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy on neurological function and cerebral hemodynamics in traumatic versus nontraumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2021;131:79-82. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-59436-7_17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59436-7_17
3. Asaad M, Taslakian EN, Banuelos J, Abu-Ghname A, Bite U, Mardini S, y col. Surgical and patient-reported outcomes in patients with PEEK versus titanium cranioplasty reconstruction. J Craniofac Surg. 2021;32(1):193-7. Doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000007192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000007192
4. Hosameldin A, Osman A, Hussein M, Gomaa AF, Abdellatif M. Three dimensional custom-made PEEK cranioplasty. Surg Neurol Int. 2021;12:587. Doi: 10.25259/SNI_861_2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_861_2021
5. Di Cosmo L, Pellicanò F, Choueiri JE, Schifino E, Stefini R, Cannizzaro D. Meta-analyses of the surgical outcomes using personalized 3D-printed titanium and PEEK vs. standard implants in cranial reconstruction in patients undergoing craniectomy. Neurosurg Rev. 2025;48(1):312. Doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03470-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-025-03470-9
6. Hughes EB, Alfarone J, Chernov ES, Debick NA, Jalal M, Kim Y, y col. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) into the future: lowering infection rates in cranioplasty. Cureus. 2024;16(10):e72060. Doi: 10.7759/cureus.72060 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.72060
7. Mian SH, Moiduddin K, Elseufy SM, Alkhalefah H. Adaptive mechanism for designing a personalized cranial implant and its 3D printing using PEEK. Polymers (Basel). 2022;14(6):1266. Doi: 10.3390/polym14061266 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14061266
