• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

  • Twitter
  • YouTube
NASBS

NASBS

North American Skull Base Society

  • Home
  • About
    • Mission Statement
    • Bylaws
    • NASBS Board of Directors
    • Committees
      • Committee Interest Form
    • NASBS Policy
    • Donate Now to the NASBS
    • Contact Us
  • Industry
    • Exhibits and Support & Visibility Opportunities
    • Industry Archives
  • Meetings
    • 2026 Annual Meeting
    • Abstracts
      • 2026 Call for Abstracts
      • NASBS Poster Archives
      • 2025 Abstract Awards
    • 2025 Recap
    • NASBS Summer Course
    • Meetings Archive
    • Other Skull Base Surgery Educational Events
  • Resources
    • Member Survey Application
    • NASBS Travel Scholarship Program
    • Research Grants
    • Fellowship Registry
    • The Rhoton Collection
    • Webinars
      • Research Committee Workshop Series
      • ARS/AHNS/NASBS Sinonasal Webinar
      • Surgeon’s Log
      • Advancing Scholarship Series
      • Trials During Turnover: Webinar Series
    • NASBS iCare Pathway Resources
    • Billing & Coding White Paper
  • Membership
    • Join NASBS
    • Membership Directory
    • Multidisciplinary Teams of Distinction
    • NASBS Mentorship Program
  • Fellowship Match
    • NASBS Neurosurgery Skull Base Fellowship Match Programs
    • NASBS Neurosurgery Skull Base Fellowship Match Application
  • Journal
  • Login/Logout

2025 Poster Presentations

2025 Poster Presentations

 

← Back to Previous Page

 

P378: BONE CEMENT VS BONE FLAP REPLACEMENT: A COMPARATIVE META-ANALYSIS OF POSTERIOR FOSSA CRANIOTOMY COMPLICATIONS
Ryan Neill, MS1; Peter Harris, MD2; Lekhaj Daggubati, MD2; 1The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences; 2The George Washington University Hospital Department of Neurosurgery

Objective: Posterior fossa surgeries are often performed to treat infratentorial pathologies such as tumors that increase intracranial pressure. Posterior fossa craniotomy has been shown to decrease incidence of postoperative complications and morbidity compared to craniectomy. More recently, the use of bone cement in posterior fossa craniotomies has been implemented, but there is limited comparative postoperative data of this technique to more commonly used bone flap replacement. This study aims to address this information gap through a meta-analysis comparing the incidence of postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leakage and other complications when utilizing bone cement versus bone flap replacement in posterior fossa craniotomies.

Methods: Following a literature review, search parameters for a systematic review were identified and relevant studies were sorted based on selection criteria to be included in the meta-analysis under PRISMA guidelines. Data analysis was performed in R studio and Microsoft Excel software. Targeted complications for analysis include: CSF leakage, pseudomeningocele formation, and infection. Pooled estimates and odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes were calculated with corresponding 95% confidence intervals and findings were translated into illustrative tables and figures.

Results: Twenty-one articles were included from systematic review, nine studies using bone cement and thirteen using bone flap (two studies reported data for both groups). With bone flap replacement, CSF leakage was 8.36% (95% CI 5.89% to 10.86%), pseudomeningocele formation was 9.22% (95% CI 4.82% to 13.62%), and infection was 6.85% (95% CI 4.05% to 9.65%). With bone cement usage, CSF leakage was 3.47% (95% CI 2.37% to 4.57%), pseudomeningocele formation was 2.43% (95% CI 1.23% to 3.63%), and infection was 1.85% (95% CI 0.75% to 2.95%). The odds ratio of CSF leak, pseudomeningocele formation, and infection was 0.39 (95% CI 0.229 to 0.559), 0.25 (95% CI 0.137 to 0.353), and 0.26 (95% CI 0.149 to 0.363) respectively with the use of bone cement compared to craniotomy.

Conclusions: Outcomes demonstrated in this meta-analysis revealed an overall decreased incidence of postoperative complications rates of CSF leak, pseudomeningocele formation, and infection when using bone cement compared to bone flap in posterior fossa craniotomies. Our study suggests bone cement use is safe and effective in posterior fossa surgery. Future studies should further assess comparative outcomes of these techniques.

View Poster

 

← Back to Previous Page

Copyright © 2025 North American Skull Base Society · Managed by BSC Management, Inc · All Rights Reserved