P22. Recurrent CSF leak following repair of incidental durotomy in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. S150-S151
Author(s):  
Michael Shost ◽  
Innocent Njoku ◽  
Christina W. Cheng ◽  
Nicholas U. Ahn ◽  
Zachary L. Gordon ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. e2.4-e3
Author(s):  
J Horan ◽  
MB Husein ◽  
C Bolger

ObjectivesThe purpose of our prospective randomised study is to compare safety and functional outcomes in traditional laminectomy versus minimally invasive (MI) bilateral laminectomy via unilateral approach for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).DesignThis is a prospective randomised trial comparing two procedures for LSS.Subjects62 patients were treated for LSS and randomised to one of two groups over a 6 month period.MethodsGroup A comprised 37 patients that underwent MI intersegmental unilateral decompression. Group B comprised 25 patients that underwent traditional laminectomy. Follow-up duration was 3 years. The primary outcomes were walking distance, the visual analogue scale (VAS) pain outcome score and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).ResultsVAS pain outcome was reduced from 9 to 2 and 8 to 5 in MI and open, ODI improved from 56.5 to 13 and 58 to 24 in MI and open respectively. Complication rates were lower in MI compared to open (8% vs 56%) and consisted of CSF leak, temporary leg pain, TIA, urinary retention and wound infections. Length of stay was 1–3 days compared to 7–30 days in MI against open respectively.ConclusionsBilateral laminectomy through a unilateral approach (MI) and traditional laminectomy are both effective in improving pain, ODI and walking distance in LSS. MI procedures have an advantage in shorter hospital stays, sparing of more bony structures and lower complication rates. We conclude that MI unilateral decompression is at least as good as laminectomy in the treatment of pain and disability in LSS.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 2483-2495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Herren ◽  
◽  
Rolf Sobottke ◽  
Anne F. Mannion ◽  
Thomas Zweig ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Adam ◽  
T. Papacocea ◽  
R. Iliescu ◽  
I. Hornea ◽  
C. Moisescu

Abstract Incidental durotomy is a common complication of lumbar spine operations for degenerative disorders. Its incidence varies depending on several risk factors and regarding the intra and postoperative management, there is no consensus. Our objective was to report our experience with incidental durotomy in patients who were operated on for lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis and revision surgeries. Between 2009 and 2012, 1259 patients were operated on for degenerative lumbar disorders. For primary operations, the surgical approach was mino-open, interlamar, uni- or bilateral, as for recurrences, the removal of the compressive element was intended: the epidural scar and the disc fragment. 863 patients (67,7%) were operated on for lumbar disc herniation, 344 patients (27,3%) were operated on for lumbar spinal stenosis and 52 patients (5%) were operated for recurrences. The operations were performed by neurosurgeons with the same professional degree but with different operative volume. Unintentional durotomy occurred in 20 (2,3%) of the patients with herniated disc, in 14 (4,07%) of the patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and in 12 (23%) of the patients who were operated on for recurrences. The most frequent risk factors were: obesity, revised surgery and the physician’s low operative volume. Intraoperative dural fissures were repaired through suture (8 cases), by applying muscle, fat graft or by applying curaspon, tachosil. There existed 4 CSF fistulas which were repaired at reoperation. Incidental dural fissures during operations for degenerative lumbar disorders must be recognized and immediately repaired to prevent complications such as CSF fistula, osteodiscitis and increased medical costs. Preventing, identifying and treating unintentional durotomies can be best achieved by respecting a neat surgical technique and a standardized treatment protocol.


1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith H. Bridwell

Author(s):  
Milan Spaić ◽  
N. Živković ◽  
M. Samardžić ◽  
I. Popović ◽  
V. Aleksić

2004 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bong Il Kim ◽  
Jong Hae Kim ◽  
Jun Seok Lee ◽  
Jin Yong Chung ◽  
Woon Seok Roh ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document