PriMera Scientific Medicine and Public Health (ISSN: 2833-5627)

Research Article

Volume 8 Issue 4

Geometry Simplifying Symmetry: An Innovative Technique to Obtain Symmetry in Cranial Implants

Monika Nandan*, Anurag Jain, Harmeet Singh and Gautam Khatak

April 07, 2026

DOI : 10.56831/PSMPH-08-282

View PDF

Abstract

Establishing symmetry in cranial prosthesis is important for better esthetics. This article presents an extremely simple and inexpensive technique for obtaining symmetry with the help of simple geometrical instruments. As a prosthodontist, it is required that maximum corrections be made at the wax up stage. Hence, major corrections are not needed in the final prosthesis after curing with clear heat-polymerizing acrylic.

Keywords: cranioplasty; polylactic acid; polymethylmethacrylate; esthetics

References

  1. Joseph TM., et al. “Prosthetic rehabilitation in neurosurgical cranioplasty”. J Indian Prosthodont Soc (2018): 76-81.
  2. Pavaiya A., et al. “Cranioplasty with alloplastic cranial implant”. J Indian Prosthodont Soc (2009): 109-11.
  3. Artico M., et al. “Bone autografting of the calvaria and craniofacial skeleton: historical background, surgical results in a series of 15 patients, and review of the literature”. Surg Neurol [Internet] (2003): 71-9.
  4. De Bonis P., et al. “Cranial repair: How complicated is filling a “hole”?”. J Neurotrauma 29 (2012): 1071-6.
  5. Stefini R., et al. “Use of “custom made” porous hydroxyapatite implants for cranioplasty: postoperative analysis of complications in 1549 patients”. Surg Neurol Int (2013).
  6. Honeybul S., et al. “A randomized controlled trial comparing autologous cranioplasty with custom-made titanium cranioplasty”. J Neurosurg (2017): 81-90.
  7. Marchac D and Greensmith A. “Long-term experience with methylmethacrylate cranioplasty in craniofacial surgery”. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2008): 744-52.
  8. Jaberi J., et al. “Long-term clinical outcome analysis of poly-methyl-methacrylate cranioplasty for large skull defects”. J Oral Maxillofac Surg (2013): e81-8.
  9. Policicchio D., et al. “Comparison of two different titanium cranioplasty methods: Custom-made titanium prostheses versus precurved titanium mesh”. Surg Neurol Int (2020): 148.
  10. Chrzan R., et al. “Cranioplasty prosthesis manufacturing based on reverse engineering technology”. Med Sci Monit (2012): MT1-6.
  11. Marbacher S., et al. “Intraoperative template-molded bone flap reconstruction for patient-specific cranioplasty”. Neurosurg Rev (2012).
  12. Slimani M., et al. “Methylmetacrylate (PMMA) cranioplasty technique: Technical interest of intraoperative modeling and review of the literature”. Ann Chir Plast Esthet (2023): 99-105.
  13. da Silva Júnior EB., et al. “Cranioplasty with three-dimensional customised mould for polymethylmethacrylate implant: a series of 16 consecutive patients with cost-effectiveness consideration”. 3D Print Med (2021): 4.
  14. Tan ETW, Ling JM and Dinesh SK. “The feasibility of producing patient-specific acrylic cranioplasty implants with a low-cost 3D printer”. J Neurosurg (2016): 1531-7.