Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 9, 2026

Three-Dimensional Reconstruction of Orbital Fractures
Published on: May 16, 2025
Cranioplasty: Review of Materials
Bruno Zanotti1, Nicola Zingaretti, Angela Verlicchi
1*Neurosurgery Clinic†Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Udine, Udine‡Neurology Unit, Free University of Neuroscience "Anemos," Reggio Emilia§Department of Maxillo-facial Surgery, University of Udine, Udine, Italy||Clinic of Neurosurgery, Ruppiner Kliniken GmbH, Neuruppin, Germany.
Abstract:
Cranioplasty remains a difficult procedure for all craniofacial surgeons, particularly when concerning the reconstruction of large lacunae in the skull. Considering the significant clinical and economic impact of the procedure, the search for materials and strategies to provide more comfortable and reliable surgical procedures is one of the most important challenges faced by modern craniofacial medicine.The purpose of this study was to compare the available data regarding the safety and clinical efficacy of materials and techniques currently used for the reconstruction of the skull. Accordingly, the scientific databases were searched for the following keywords autologous bone, biomaterials, cranial reconstruction, cranioplasty, hydroxyapatite, polyetheretherketone, polymethylmethacrylate, and titanium. This literature review emphasizes the benefits and weaknesses of each considered material commonly used for cranioplasty, especially in terms of infectious complications, fractures, and morphological outcomes.As regards the latter, this appears to be very similar among the different materials when custom three-dimensional modeling is used for implant development, suggesting that this criterion is strongly influenced by implant design. However, the overall infection rate can vary from 0% to 30%, apparently dependent on the type of material used, likely in virtue of the wide variation in their chemico-physical composition. Among the different materials used for cranioplasty implants, synthetics such as polyetheretherketone, polymethylmethacrylate, and titanium show a higher primary tear resistance, whereas hydroxyapatite and autologous bone display good biomimetic properties, although the latter has been ascribed a variable reabsorption rate of between 3% and 50%.In short, all cranioplasty procedures and materials have their advantages and disadvantages, and none of the currently available materials meet the criteria required for an ideal implant. Hence, the choice of cranioplasty materials is still essentially reliant on the surgeon's preference.
Related Concept Videos
Overview of the Skull
The cranial vault surrounds and protects the brain and houses the middle and inner ear structures. This cavity is bounded superiorly by the rounded top of the skull, which...
Sutures of the Skull
Sutures are immobile joints between adjacent bones of the skull. The narrow gap between the bones is filled with dense, fibrous connective tissue that unites the bones. The long sutures located between the skull bones are not straight but instead follow irregular, tightly twisting paths. These twisting lines tightly...
Cranial Bones: Superior and Posterior View
The frontal bone is the single bone that forms the forehead. At its anterior midline, between the eyebrows, there is a slight depression called the glabella. The frontal bone also forms the supraorbital margin of the orbit. Near the middle of this margin is the supraorbital foramen, the opening that provides passage for a sensory nerve to the forehead. The frontal bone is thickened just above each supraorbital margin,...
Cranial Bones: Lateral View
The temporal bone forms the lower lateral side of the skull. The temporal bone is subdivided into several regions. The flattened upper portion is the squamous portion of the temporal bone. Below this area and projecting anteriorly is the zygomatic process of the temporal bone, which forms the posterior portion of the zygomatic arch. Posteriorly is the mastoid portion of the temporal bone. Projecting...

