A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India.
Overview
- Department of Neurosurgery, Sawai Man Singh Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan India
- Department of Neurosurgery, M.G.M. Medical College and MYH Hospital, Indore, Madhya Pradesh India
- Department of Neurosurgery, Max Smart Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi India
Abstract
Background and objectives: Duraplasty is commonly required when primary dural closure is not feasible during cranial surgery. Although both autologous and synthetic dural substitutes are widely used, high-quality prospective data comparing their early postoperative safety remain limited. This study aimed to compare early postoperative complication rates following cranial duraplasty using autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene (G-Patch).
Methods: This prospective randomized comparative study enrolled 121 consecutive patients undergoing cranial duraplasty at a tertiary care center between January and December 2021. Following exclusion of patients who died within 30 days postoperatively, 100 patients (50 per group) were included in the final analysis. Patients were allocated to receive either autologous pericranium (n = 50) or high-density polypropylene (G-Patch) (n = 50) using a standardized surgical technique. The primary outcome was the occurrence of any postoperative complication within 30 days, including cerebrospinal fluid leak, wound infection, and subdural empyema. Effect estimates were expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and a limited adjusted analysis was performed as a sensitivity assessment.
Results: Traumatic brain injury and intracranial space-occupying lesions were the most common indications for surgery. Most patients in both groups had an uneventful postoperative course. Early postoperative complications occurred in 26% of patients in the synthetic graft group and 12% in the autologous group. The unadjusted odds ratio for any complication with synthetic graft use was 2.58 (95% CI: 0.88–7.54; p = 0.08). After adjustment for primary diagnosis, graft type remained a non-significant predictor of complications. No consistent associations were observed between postoperative complications and comorbidities or substance use in exploratory analyses.
Conclusion: In this prospective randomized cohort, both autologous pericranium and high-density polypropylene demonstrated acceptable short-term safety profiles. However, given the limited sample size, imbalance in underlying diagnoses, and short follow-up, these findings should be interpreted with caution and should not be considered evidence of equivalence between graft materials. Further studies with larger sample sizes, stratified analyses, and long-term outcomes are required.
Trial registration: This investigator-initiated pragmatic randomized study was not prospectively registered in a clinical trial registry.
Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/
Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.
Code
The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.
Tracing map
A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.
Data
Datasets cited
- figshare:32930779, at figshare; found in DataCite
- figshare:32930782, at figshare; found in DataCite
Data availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.
Versions
The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.
Version 1, 27 September 2026: the first record
Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 5 authors, 6 keywords, 30 references.
Cite
This paper
Gupta, S., Gupta, R., Sheikh, Z., Jain, K., & Kumar, S. (2026). A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India. Chinese neurosurgical journal, 12(1), 21. https://
BibTeX
@article{gupta2026compar
author = {Gupta, Shubham and Gupta, Rakesh and Sheikh, Zafar and Jain, Kapil and Kumar, Saksham},
title = {{A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India}},
journal = {Chinese neurosurgical journal},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
volume = {12},
number = {1},
pages = {21},
publisher = {BMC},
issn = {2095-9370},
doi = {10.1186/
url = {https://
pmid = {42415220},
pmcid = {PMC13339683}
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
AU - Gupta, Shubham
AU - Gupta, Rakesh
AU - Sheikh, Zafar
AU - Jain, Kapil
AU - Kumar, Saksham
TI - A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India
T2 - Chinese neurosurgical journal
J2 - Chin Neurosurg J
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/
VL - 12
IS - 1
SP - 21
SN - 2095-9370
PB - BMC
DO - 10.1186/
UR - https://
LA - en
ER -
CSL-JSON
{
"id": "10.1186/
"type": "article-journal",
"title": "A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India",
"container-title": "Chinese neurosurgical journal",
"author": [
{
"family": "Gupta",
"given": "Shubham"
},
{
"family": "Gupta",
"given": "Rakesh"
},
{
"family": "Sheikh",
"given": "Zafar"
},
{
"family": "Jain",
"given": "Kapil"
},
{
"family": "Kumar",
"given": "Saksham"
}
],
"container-title-short":
"volume": "12",
"issue": "1",
"page": "21",
"DOI": "10.1186/
"PMID": "42415220",
"PMCID": "PMC13339683",
"ISSN": "2095-9370",
"publisher": "BMC",
"URL": "https://
"language": "en",
"issued": {
"date-parts": [
[
2026,
7,
7
]
]
}
}
Similar papers
No other paper with a page shares enough with this one yet: tools, categories, datasets, references or authors.
Contribute
The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.
Sign in with ORCID to claim this paper as one of its authors, correct its record or validate its tracing map: when the paper's metadata lists your ORCID iD, you are recognized at once. Maintainers of its code: sign in with GitHub, then claim the repository on your account page.
Claim this paper
Correct its record
Say what each link of this record is, remove the ones that are not the paper's, add the ones that are missing. The correction becomes a new version of the record, in its Versions section.
Request its removal
To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).
Discussion, reproductions, activity
Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.
Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.
Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.
