The analysis was severely limited by the paucity in literature. Patients who had undergone PEEK cranioplasties had 0.127 times the odds of developing post-op complications (P=0.360) and 0.170 times the odds of implant failure compared to individuals who had undergone titanium mesh cranioplasties (P=0.168). Patients who underwent cranioplasties with PEEK implants had 0.130 times the odds of developing post-operative complications (P=0.065) and 0.574 times the odds of implant failure compared to patients with autologous bone graft cranioplasties (P=0.629).

Of these patients, 15.3% developed post-operative complications and 8.7% experienced implant failure requiring reoperation. Fifteen articles, comprised of 183 PEEK cranioplasty patients were included. Pooled odds ratios using the Mantel-Haenszel method were used for analysis. Studies that contained outcome data on complication rates of PEEK cranioplasty patients and studies that compared outcomes of patients who underwent PEEK cranioplasties versus other materials were included in the meta-analysis.

To compare complication and implant failure rates after PEEK, autologous and titanium mesh cranioplasties, the authors of this study conducted a systematic review using the PubMed database. However, there remains limited data that compares its long-term complication rate to autologous grafts and titanium mesh implants. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been used in cranioplasty since the early 2000s. At present, PEEK implants are increasingly used as spinal cages 4, skull or maxillofacial defect repair implants 5, 6, dental implants 7, joint replacements 8, fixation devices 9, and so on.PEEK cages are widely used in spinal fusion due to their radiolucency and low elastic modulus 10, 11, 12.

Peek plastic implant