Repair methods for refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures and their clinical effectiveness

Wang Mengna; Liang Pengfei; Bi Changlong; Huang Mitao; He Zhiyou; Zhang Pihong; Zhou Jie; Zeng Jizhang; Lan Song; Liu Jinfang

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20250106-00008

Volume 41 Issue 6

Jun. 2025

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > CHINESE JOURNAL OF BURNS AND WOUNDS > 2025 > 41(6): 525-533

Wang Mengna, Liang Pengfei, Bi Changlong, et al. Repair methods for refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures and their clinical effectiveness[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF BURNS AND WOUNDS, 2025, 41(6): 525-533. Doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20250106-00008

Citation:

PDF( 6733 KB)

Repair methods for refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures and their clinical effectiveness

doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20250106-00008

1.
Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China
2.
Department of Neurosurgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha 410008, China

Funds:

General Program of Hunan Natural Science Foundation of China 2023JJ30909

More Information

Corresponding author: Liang Pengfei, Email: liangpengfeijbm@163.com
Received Date: 2025-01-06

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To investigate the repair methods for refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures and their clinical effectiveness. Methods This study was a retrospective observational study. From September 2020 to July 2024, 68 patients with refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures who met the inclusion criteria were admitted to the Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery of Xiangya Hospital of Central South University (hereinafter referred to as our hospital) and were co-managed with neurosurgeons from our hospital. Among them, 38 were male and 30 were female, aged 1 to 76 years. Based on the causes of difficult wound healing, the refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures were classified into 5 categories: simple tissue defect wounds, simple infectious wounds, implant-related wounds, wounds communicating with paranasal sinuses, and radiation-damaged wounds. Corresponding management plans were adopted according to the wound condition. After wound bed preparation was completed, according to factors such as wound location, size, blood supply condition, need for soft tissue filling, and the patient's general condition, and also following the principle of minimizing damage, patients with no obvious scalp soft tissue defect were sutured directly. For patients with large defects that could not be sutured directly (with wound area of 8 cm×3 cm to 28 cm×13 cm), the most suitable tissue flaps (including pedicled scalp flaps and free tissue flaps) were designed to repair the wounds. The donor site wounds of scalp flaps were directly sutured or repaired by full-thickness skin grafting and the donor site wounds of free tissue flaps were directly sutured. Before surgery, the types of refractory wounds and the microbial culture results of wound exudate specimens were recorded. During surgery, the wound repair methods, types of free tissue flaps, recipient vessels, and vascular anastomosis methods between donor and recipient sites were recorded. After surgery, the recovery of the head wounds and the tissue flap donor sites was observed. The recipient site appearance, blood supply, wound recurrence, and subsequent management were followed up. Results Among 68 patients, 2 cases had simple tissue defect wounds, 15 cases had simple infectious wounds, 43 cases had implant-related wounds, 4 cases had wounds communicating with paranasal sinuses, and 4 cases had radiation-damaged wounds. Before surgery, the microbial culture results of wound exudate specimens were positive in 28 cases. After wound bed preparation was completed, the wounds of 17 patients were sutured directly, the wounds of 31 patients were repaired with pedicled scalp flap transfer, and the wounds of 20 patients were repaired with free tissue flap transplantation. Of the 20 patients who underwent free tissue flap transplantation for wound repair, 12 patients had the superficial temporal arteries and veins as the recipient vessels and 8 patients had the facial arteries and veins as the recipient vessels. Among them, 2 patients had their blood vessels anastomosed using a flow-through technique, while the remaining 18 patients underwent end-to-end anastomosis between donor and recipient vessels. After surgery, the head wounds of 66 patients healed, and the head wounds of 2 patients did not heal, which healed after undergoing debridement surgery again. All tissue flap donor sites recovered well. During follow-up of 6 to 32 months, all patients had good blood supply in the recipient sites, acceptable head shape, and no wound recurrence. Among them, 4 patients underwent titanium mesh reimplantation after scalp expansion at a later stage, and 2 patients developed new-onset epilepsy which was controlled with medication. Conclusions Based on an adequate assessment of the causes of difficult wound healing, targeted removal of factors affecting wound healing, and use of direct suture, pedicled scalp flap transfer, or free tissue flap transplantation to repair complex refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures can achieve favorable clinical treatment outcomes.
- Head,
- Surgical flaps,
- Infection,
- Prostheses and implants,
- Refractory wounds,
- Wound repair

(1) Based on the causes of difficult wound healing, refractory head wounds involving intracranial structures were classified into 5 categories: simple tissue defect wounds, simple infectious wounds, implant-related wounds, wounds communicating with paranasal sinuses, and radiation-damaged wounds, with distinct management principles for each type being explicated.
(2) Direct suture, pedicled scalp flap transfer or free tissue flap transplantation were applied to repair the wounds according to factors such as wound location, size, blood supply condition, need for soft tissue filling, and the patient's general condition after wound bed preparation, and also following the principle of minimizing damage.

FullText(HTML)

References(43)

References

[1]	Hutchinson PJ, Adams H, Mohan M, et al. Decompressive craniectomy versus craniotomy for acute subdural hematoma[J]. N Engl J Med, 2023, 388(24): 2219-2229. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2214172.
[2]	Wang H, Li N, Bao Q, et al. Role of plastic surgery in the treatment of titanium mesh exposure following cranioplasty[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2024, 35(4): 1080-1083. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000010145.
[3]	Zhang P, Fu X, Huang Y, et al. Consensus on the preventionand repair of titanium mesh exposed wound after cranioplasty (2024 edition)[J/OL].Burns Trauma, 2024, 12: tkae055[2025-01-06]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39445225/. DOI: 10.1093/burnst/tkae055.
[4]	杨力, 蔡斌, 薛君荣, 等. 个体化股前外侧皮瓣游离移植修复复杂难愈性创面的临床效果[J]. 中华烧伤杂志, 2020, 36(8): 730-734. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20190621-00281.
[5]	Zheng Z, Liu H, Liu S, et al. Mesenchymal stem cells in craniofacial reconstruction: a comprehensive review[J]. Front Mol Biosci, 2024, 11: 1362338. DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2024.1362338.
[6]	Yang YH, Jeng SF, Hsieh CH, et al. Vacuum-assisted closure for complicated wounds in head and neck region after reconstruction[J]. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 2013, 66(8): e209-216. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2013.03.006.
[7]	尚银武, 王飞, 刘建雄, 等. 高压电击伤致头皮缺损及脑脓肿1例[J]. 中国神经精神疾病杂志, 2022, 48(2): 105-108. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0152.2022.02.008.
[8]	Dechaene V, Gallet C, Soueges S, et al. Diagnostic, clinical management, and outcome of bone flap-related osteomyelitis after cranioplasty[J]. Int J Infect Dis, 2023, 137: 48-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2023.10.008.
[9]	Zhao YH, Feng YH, Deng HT, et al. Therapeutic strategies for retention of cranioplasty titanium mesh after mesh exposure[J]. Acta Neurochir (Wien), 2022, 164(12): 3101-3106. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-022-05365-w.
[10]	中国医师协会创面修复专业委员会. 颅骨成形术后钛网外露预防和创面修复全国专家共识(2024版)[J]. 中华烧伤与创面修复杂志, 2024, 40(10): 901-910. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20240203-00047.
[11]	Yu LB, Huang Z, Ren ZG, et al. Supraorbital keyhole versus pterional craniotomies for ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms: a propensity score-matched analysis[J]. Neurosurg Rev, 2020, 43(2): 547-554. DOI: 10.1007/s10143-018-1053-y.
[12]	梁鹏飞, 许喜生, 张丕红, 等. 累及鼻窦的面部复杂缺损创面的修复方法及其临床效果[J]. 中华烧伤与创面修复杂志, 2023, 39(3): 221-227. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20221130-00520.
[13]	Liao JB, Chen W, Lee HS, et al. Histopathology of fluoroscopy-induced radiation ulcer: a case series study in comparison with morphea[J]. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges, 2020, 18(5): 447-454. DOI: 10.1111/ddg.14092.
[14]	Zhou Y, Zhang Y. Single- versus 2-stage reconstruction for chronic post-radiation chest wall ulcer: a 10-year retrospective study of chronic radiation-induced ulcers[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2019, 98(8): e14567. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014567.
[15]	Zhou B, Long Y, Li S, et al. Reconstruction of chronic radiation-induced ulcers in the chest wall using free and pedicle flaps[J]. Front Surg, 2022, 9: 1010990. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1010990.
[16]	Dong W, Zhang X, Luo X, et al. Regional flap: a reliable coverage for post-radiation ulcer[J]. Int Wound J, 2023, 20(6): 2224-2232. DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14103.
[17]	Yamamura K, Endo Y, Kabashima K. Occipital artery island V-Y flap for the reconstruction of temporal scalp defect[J]. Int J Dermatol, 2020, 59(8): e296-e298. DOI: 10.1111/ijd.14865.
[18]	Ranjan K, Venkataramu V, Achanti HP, et al. The role of pedicled latissimus dorsi flap in scalp defect reconstruction following tumour excision[J]. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2021, 73(1): 129-132. DOI: 10.1007/s12070-020-02071-w.
[19]	毛小炎, 归来. 颅骨缺损的临床修复进展[J]. 中国美容整形外科杂志, 2017, 28(3): 184-186. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-7040.2017.03.019.
[20]	Soto E, Restrepo RD, Grant JH 3rd, et al. Outcomes of cranioplasty strategies for high-risk complex cranial defects: a 10-year experience[J]. Ann Plast Surg, 2022, 88(5 Suppl 5): S449-454. DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003019.
[21]	Kwiecien GJ, Aliotta R, Bassiri Gharb B, et al. The timing of alloplastic cranioplasty in the setting of previous osteomyelitis[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2019, 143(3): 853-861. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005363.
[22]	王蕾, 张毅. 现代颅骨修补材料的临床应用分析[J]. 神经损伤与功能重建, 2018, 13(7): 355-357. DOI: 10.16780/j.cnki.sjssgncj.2018.07.009.
[23]	Yeap MC, Tu PH, Liu ZH, et al. Long-term complications of cranioplasty using stored autologous bone graft, three-dimensional polymethyl methacrylate, or titanium mesh after decompressive craniectomy: a single-center experience after 596 procedures[J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 128: e841-e850. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.005.
[24]	Azzam D, Romiyo P, Nguyen T, et al. Dural repair in cranial surgery is associated with moderate rates of complications with both autologous and nonautologous dural substitutes [J]. World Neurosurg, 2018, 113: 244-248. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.115.
[25]	陈政源, 寿雪飞, 沈明, 等. 神经内镜经鼻入路切除颅底肿瘤术中颅底重建的临床疗效[J]. 中华神经外科杂志, 2020, 36(1): 2-6. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-2346.2020.01.002.
[26]	Chen W, Wang Y, Zheng J, et al. Characterization of cellular senescence in radiation ulcers and therapeutic effects of mesenchymal stem cell-derived conditioned medium [J/OL]. Burns Trauma, 2023, 11: tkad001[2025-01-06]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37188110/. DOI: 10.1093/burnst/tkad001.
[27]	Li X, Zhang F, Liu X, et al. Staged treatment of chest wall radiation-induced ulcer with negative pressure wound therapy and latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap transplantation[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2019, 30(5): e450-e453. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000005514.
[28]	Hamada M, Nakahara T, Yazawa M, et al. Radiation-induced osteomyelitis/osteonecrosis of the rib: SPECT/CT imaging for successful surgical management[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open, 2019, 7(12): e2536. DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002536.
[29]	Borrelli MR, Shen AH, Lee GK, et al. Radiation-induced skin fibrosis: pathogenesis, current treatment options, and emerging therapeutics[J]. Ann Plast Surg, 2019, 83(4S Suppl 1): S59-64. DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002098.
[30]	刘鑫, 韩愚弟, 崔蕾, 等. 分阶段游离背阔肌皮瓣移植及颅骨轮廓重建治疗头部钛网外露合并软组织感染[J]. 中国修复重建外科杂志, 2022, 36(7): 828-833. DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.202202061.
[31]	郭鹏飞, 王旭, 魏爱周, 等. 基于供区保护理念的游离股前外侧分叶穿支皮瓣在头部电烧伤创面修复中的临床应用效果[J]. 中华烧伤与创面修复杂志, 2022, 38(1): 77-80. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20201111-00470.
[32]	于峻懿, 宋达疆, 刘旭, 等. 组合组织瓣移植修复巨大胸壁缺损的临床效果[J]. 中华烧伤与创面修复杂志, 2024, 40(7): 650-656. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501225-20231120-00199.
[33]	李文涛, 董中洋, 刘伟, 等. 串联组合皮瓣修复前足负重区及周围大面积软组织缺损[J]. 中华手外科杂志, 2023, 39(2): 147-149. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn311653-20220907-00234.
[34]	车永琦, 张伟, 程芳斌, 等. 嵌合股前外侧肌皮瓣修复伴有空腔的足部创面10例[J]. 中华显微外科杂志, 2023, 46(2): 190-192. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441206-20220613-00117.
[35]	宋达疆, 彭文, 李赞, 等. 股内侧嵌合穿支肌皮瓣的解剖分类和在头颈重建领域的应用[J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2020, 55(5): 483-489. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20190711-00436.
[36]	Dong L, Dong Y, Liu C, et al. Latissimus dorsi-myocutaneous flap in the repair of titanium mesh exposure and scalp defect after cranioplasty[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2020, 31(2): 351-354. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000006016.
[37]	Vargo JD, Przylecki W, Camarata PJ, et al. Classification and microvascular flap selection for anterior cranial fossa reconstruction[J]. J Reconstr Microsurg, 2018, 34(8): 590-600. DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1649520.
[38]	Vuola J, Ohman J, Mäkitie AA. Microvascular free flap reconstruction of skull base penetrating tumors[J]. J Reconstr Microsurg, 2011, 27(5): 313-320. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1278715.
[39]	Nwaba A, Ho A, Ellis MF. Microvascular reconstruction of the anterior skull base[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2022, 33(8): e886-e890. DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000008930.
[40]	Neamonitou F, Kotrotsiou M, Stavrianos S. Microvascular reconstruction of the anterior skull base tumors; our experience[J]. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 2021, 74(6): 1355-1401. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.11.036.
[41]	Han DH, Park MC, Park DH, et al. Role of muscle free flap in the salvage of complicated scalp wounds and infected prosthetic dura[J]. Arch Plast Surg, 2013, 40(6): 735-741. DOI: 10.5999/aps.2013.40.6.735.
[42]	Golub VM, Reddy DS. Post-traumatic epilepsy and comorbidities: advanced models, molecular mechanisms, biomarkers, and novel therapeutic interventions[J]. Pharmacol Rev, 2022, 74(2): 387-438. DOI: 10.1124/pharmrev.121.000375.
[43]	Bader ER, Kobets AJ, Ammar A, et al. Factors predicting complications following cranioplasty[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2022, 50(2): 134-139. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2021.08.001.