Background: Although surgical techniques for the treatment of skull bone tumors have advanced considerably, there is still no unified or structured concept that defines the optimal surgical and reconstructive strategy for these lesions. Careful preoperative planning, particularly the digital design of resection margins and the fabrication of patient-specific stereolithographic templates based on MSCT data, offers surgeons the possibility of performing more accurate and aesthetically predictable operations.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the practical benefits of using patient-specific stereolithographic templates to determine the extent of bone resection in patients with skull bone tumors.

Methods: The analysis included 12 patients with skull bone tumors who underwent resection with the assistance of an individually manufactured stereolithographic guide. Each template was generated using three-dimensional CT data, allowing the surgical team to define resection lines with high precision before surgery. The main indication for intervention was aesthetic deformity. Postoperative evaluation involved follow-up CT imaging and assessment of both functional and cosmetic results.

Results: The planned resection boundaries were reproduced intraoperatively with high accuracy in all patients. Eight individuals underwent simultaneous cranioplasty. Implant positioning was performed without technical difficulties, achieving satisfactory symmetry and contour. No postoperative complications were observed, and all patients were discharged in stable condition.

Conclusion: The use of patient-specific stereolithographic templates helped shorten operative time while ensuring radical tumor removal. Immediate cranioplasty allowed for aesthetic restoration of cranial contours and eliminated the need for secondary procedures.

Patient-specific template, skull bone tumors, preoperative virtual planning

Bloch O, McDermott MW (2011) In situ cranioplasty for hyperostosing meningeomas of the cranial vault. Can J Neurol Sci 38:59–64;

Marbacher S, Coluccia D, Fathi AR, Andereggen L, Beck J, Fandino J (2011) Intraoperative patient-specific reconstruction of partial bone flap defects after convexity meningioma resection. World Neurosurg 79(1):124–130;

Chen TC. Primary Intraosseous Meningioma. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2016;27(2):189-93;

Inagaki K, Otsuka F, Matsui T, Ogura T, Makino H. Effect of etidronate on intraosseous meningioma. Endocr J. 2004;51(3):389-90;

Gui H, Zhang S, Shen SG, Wang X, Bautista JS, Voss PJ. Real-time image-guided recontouring in the management of craniofacial fibrous dysplasia. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. (2013) 116:680–5. doi: 10.1016/j.oooo.2013.07.012;

Broeckx CE, Maal TJJ, Vreeken RD, Bos RRM, Ter Laan M. Single-step resection of an intraosseous meningioma and cranial reconstruction: technical note.World Neurosurg. (2017) 108:225–9. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.08.177;

Carolus A, Weihe S, Schmieder K, Brenke C. One-step CAD/CAM titanium cranioplasty after drilling template-assisted resection of intraosseous skull base meningioma: technical note. Acta Neurochir (Wien). (2017) 159:447– 52. doi: 10.1007/s00701-016-3053-4;

Outcomes following polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cranioplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis. Punchak M, Chung LK, Lagman C, et al. J Clin Neurosci. 2017;41:30–35.

Syndrome of the trephined. Joseph V, Reilly P. J Neurosurg. 2009;111:650–652.

Carolus A, Weihe S, Schmieder K, Brenke C. One-step CAD/CAM titanium cranioplasty after drilling template-assisted resection of intraosseous skull base meningioma: technical note. Acta Neurochir (Wien). (2017) 159:447–52. doi: 10.1007/s00701-016-3053-4

Schebesch KM, Höhne J, Gassner HG, Brawanski A. Preformed titanium cranioplasty after resection of skull base meningiomas - a technical note. J.Craniomaxillofac Surg. (2013) 41:803–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2013.01.030

Velnar T, Pregelj R, Limbaeck-Stokin C. Brain meningioma invading and destructing the skull bone: replacement of the missing bone in vivo. RadiolOncol. (2011) 45:304–9. doi: 10.2478/v10019-011-0036-1

Macmillan A, Lopez J, Mundinger GS, et al. Virtual surgical planning for correction of delayed presentation scaphocephaly using a modified melbourne technique. J Craniofac Surg 2018;29:914–919

Iyer RR,Wu A, Macmillan A, et al. Use of computer-assisted design and manufacturing to localize dural venous sinuses during reconstructive surgery for craniosynostosis. Childs Nerv Syst 2018;34:137–142

Cavalu S, Antoniac IV, Mohan A, Bodog F, Doicin C, Mates I,et al. Nanoparticles and nanostructured surface fabrication for innovative cranial and maxillofacial surgery. Materials (Basel). (2020) 13:5391. doi: 10.3390/ma13235391

Guelinckx PJ, Boeckx WD, Fossion E, Gruwez JA. Scanning electron microscopy of irradiated recipient blood vessels in head and neck free flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984; 74: 217–26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198408000-00008

Olascoage A, Vilar-Compte D, Poitevin-Charcon A, Contreras-Ruiz J. Wound healing in radiated skin: pathophysiology and treatment options. Int Wound J 2008; 5: 246–57. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-481X.2008.00436.x

Sakamoto Y, Koike N, Takei H, OhnoM,Miwa T, Yoshida K et al. Influence of backscatter radiation on cranial reconstruction implants. Br J Radiol. (2017) 90:20150537. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20150537

Das IJ, Kahn FM. Backscatter dose perturbation at high atomic number interfaces in megavoltage photon beams. Med Phys 1989; 16: 367–75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596345

Das IJ, Kase KR, Meigooni AS, Khan FM, Werner BL. Validity of transition-zone dosimetry at high atomic number interfaces in megavoltage photon beams. Med Phys 1990; 17: 10–6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596553

Yaremchuk MJ. Facial skeletal reconstruction using porous polyethylene implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;111:1818–1827

Timing for cranioplasty to improve neurological outcome: A systematic review Maria C De Cola, Francesco Corallo, Deborah Pria, Viviana Lo Buono, Rocco S. Calabrò.