Abstract
Watertight dural reconstruction represents the golden standard of every intradural surgery. Aim: Autologous graft versus xenogenic graft comparison in dural reconstruction.
Patients and methods: Our prospective study evaluated data of 86 patients who underwent a neurosurgical procedure. We divided patients into two groups.
We used an autologous graft (fascia, periost) in the fi rst group and xenogenic bio material in the second group to perform dural reconstruction. Xenogenic biomaterial was Dural graft Biodesign(R) (Cook-Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA).
In both groups, we assessed the incidence of cerebrospinal fl uid leakage, infectious and non-infectious complications of wound healing. Results: Cerebrospinal fl uid leakage occurred in the group with the xenogenic dural graft in 11.6% and in the group with the autologous graft in 9.3%.
Infection rate was low, 4.6% in both groups. All patients received standard wound care according to the workplace routine.
We detected no alergic reaction or graft rejection in any of our patients. Complete follow up was successful in 77 cases (89.5%) of all pacients.
Diff erence between incidence of liquor fi stula showed no statistical diff erence in both groups (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Application of xenogenic graft is very easy and simple and we consider it suitable for dural reconstruction.