LAUSR

Dear Professor: First of all, thanks to our Indian friends for their attention to our article. I have read the literature of the Indian professor carefully. Their articles should also be original. Since “Hinge Craniectomy” was proposed in 2007, many other similar craniotomy techniques have been proposed[1–7]. Schematics of some of the techniques reported in the literature are shown below (Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). I also cited these classical literature in my article. However, it is impossible to cite all relevant literature in the article. Finally, I want to emphasize three main points of our article. (1) Our technique was used in children (ages between 2 and 18 years). The effectiveness of this technique in adult patients needs to be further studied. (2) We emphasize the effect of 5 mm elevation of bone flap on patient prognosis. The technique used by the Indian professor raised the bone flap by more than 1 cm, according to his schematic. Raising the bone flap 5 mm can provide enough space in our patients and in literature[8], so we do not need to raise the bone flap too much, which will lead to scalp suture difficulties and affect the appearance of the patient. (3) Most importantly, we emphasize the use of absorbable skull locks. With the absorption of skull locks, the bone flap reconnects to the skull. Some bone flaps could even return to their original position, as shown in our article[9]. This could reduce a range of complications such as hydrocephalus and subdural effusion. Fig. 1 A novel reversibly expandable dynamic craniotomy bone flap fixation plate proposed by Rohit Khanna, MD in 2019