Trends and Outcomes of Cranioplasty Alone Versus Single-Stage Composite Scalp and Calvarial Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cranioplasty is a critical intervention to restore the calvarium using autologous or alloplastic materials with single-stage composite scalp and calvarial reconstruction reserved for complex cases. This study aims to identify 30-day outcomes in scalp and calvarial reconstruction using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of the 2010 to 2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Adult patients who underwent cranioplasty were identified using current procedural terminology coding and included by exposure type (autologous, alloplastic, composite, or other). Subjects with missing exposure or outcome data were excluded. Primary outcome was 30-day reoperation, whereas secondary outcomes were 30-day unplanned readmission and transfusion. Univariate analysis was completed to assess differences in demographics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to control for confounders. RESULTS: In total, 1719 patients underwent cranioplasty (mean age 54.7 ± 15.3 years, 43.5% male), including 169(9.8%) autologous, 1303(75.8%) alloplastic, 32(1.9%) composite, and 215(12.5%) other procedures. Cranioplasty procedures were associated with 30-day complication and mortality rate of 16.5% and 2.4%, respectively. Composite cranioplasty was associated with decreased 30-day reoperation (adjusted odds ratios 0.11, 95% confidence interval 0.014-0.94, P = 0.044). There was no statistically significant difference in readmission between cranioplasty groups. Alloplastic cranioplasty was associated with decreased odds of postoperative transfusion (adjusted odds ratios 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.27â0.84, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cranioplasty is an increasingly common procedure. Alloplastic cranioplasty is associated with decreased 30-day transfusion requirement, whereas single-stage composite reconstruction is a viable option and associated with decreased 30-day reoperation with no difference in readmission.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".