| Literature DB >> 27853662 |
Tianyi Niu1, Derek S Lu1, Andrew Yew1, Darryl Lau2, Haydn Hoffman1, David McArthur1, Dean Chou2, Daniel C Lu3.
Abstract
Study Design Retrospective chart review. Objective Postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak is a known complication of intraoperative durotomy. Intraoperative placement of subfascial epidural drains following primary dural repair has been proposed as a potential management strategy to prevent formation of CSF cutaneous fistula and symptomatic pseudomeningocele. Here we describe our experience with subfascial drain after intentional durotomy. Methods Medical records of patients who underwent placement of subfascial epidural drains during spinal procedures with intentional intraoperative durotomies over a 4-year period at two institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes of interest were postoperative CSF cutaneous fistula or symptomatic pseudomeningocele formation. Results Twenty-five patients were included. Mean length of follow-up was 9.5 months. Twelve patients (48%) underwent simultaneous arthrodesis. The average duration of the drain was 5.3 days with average daily output of 126.5 mL. Subgroup analyses revealed that average drain duration for the arthrodesis group was 6.33 days, which is significantly greater than that of the nonfused group, which was 3.7 days (p = 0.016). Similarly, the average daily drain output for the arthrodesis subgroup at 153.1 mL was significantly higher than that of the nonfused subgroup (86.8 mL, p = 0.04). No patient developed postoperative CSF cutaneous fistula or symptomatic pseudomeningocele or had negative sequelae associated with overdrainage of CSF. One patient had a delayed wound infection. Conclusions The intraoperative placement of subfascial epidural drains was not associated with postoperative development of CSF cutaneous fistula, symptomatic pseudomeningocele, overdrainage, or subdural hematoma in the cases reviewed. Subfascial closed wound drain placement is a safe and efficacious management method after intentional spinal durotomies. It is particularly helpful in those who undergo simultaneous arthrodesis, as those patients have statistically higher daily drain output and longer drain durations.Entities:
Keywords: CSF leak; arthrodesis; intentional durotomy; subfascial epidural drain
Year: 2016 PMID: 27853662 PMCID: PMC5110360 DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1582392
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Global Spine J ISSN: 2192-5682
Detailed description of all 25 subjects who underwent surgeries involving intentional durotomies in the two institutions from the surgeons' case log
| Patient no. | Age (y) and sex | Operations | Indication | Fusion | Levels | LOD (d) | F/U (mo) | Preoperative radiation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 42 M | L1–3 laminectomy | Prostate cancer metastatic to T11 vertebral body | Y | 7 | 9 | 5 | N |
| 2 | 18 M | C1–C7 laminectomy | C1–C4 neurofibromas | Y | 11 | 8 | 28 | N |
| 3 | 77 F | T11–T12 laminectomy | T12 intradural extramedullary nerve sheath tumor | Y | 2 | 4 | 21 | N |
| 4 | 65 F | T5–T7 laminectomy | T6 intradural extramedullary tumor and extradural foraminal tumor | Y | 3 | 4 | 4 | N |
| 5 | 41 F | C4–T2 laminectomy | Left C4–T2 intradural extramedullary neurofibroma | Y | 6 | 4 | 14 | N |
| 6 | 64 M | T5–T7 laminectomy | T6 intradural intramedullary hemangioblastoma | Y | 3 | 6 | 4 | N |
| 7 | 64 M | T2–T5 laminectomy | Epidural renal cell carcinoma metastatic to T2–T3 and T4–T5 | Y | 11 | 18 | 0.5 | Y |
| 8 | 66 M | T2–T4 laminectomy | T3 ventral epidural metastatic prostate cancer | Y | 3 | 9 | 3 | N |
| 9 | 74 F | T7–10 laminectomy | Metastatic T7–T10 intradural/extradural breast cancer | Y | 5 | 9 | 1 | N |
| 10 | 25 M | C3–C6 diskectomy | Left C4–C6 nerve sheath tumor | Y | 4 | 3 | 9 | N |
| 11 | 75 F | T6–T7 laminectomy | T6–T7 intradural arachnoid cyst | Y | 2 | 4 | 1 | N |
| 12 | 50 M | L5 laminectomy | Capillary hemangioblastoma (WHO grade I) | N | 1 | 3 | 12 | N |
| 13 | 65 F | T12–L1 laminectomy, T11–L1 total left facetectomy | Cellular schwannoma (WHO grade I) | Y | 3 | 8 | 12 | N |
| 14 | 66 M | L2–L3 laminectomy (MIS) | Schwannoma | N | 2 | 3 | 12 | N |
| 15 | 49 F | L4 laminectomy | Schwannoma | N | 1 | 3 | 14 | N |
| 16 | 65 F | L1–L2 laminectomy | Myxopapillary ependymoma (WHO grade I) | N | 2 | 3 | 12 | N |
| 17 | 64 F | T7–T9 laminectomy | Meningioma (WHO grade I) | N | 3 | 3 | 20 | N |
| 18 | 67 F | C1 laminectomy | Meningioma (WHO grade I) | N | 1 | 3 | 21 | N |
| 19 | 51 M | L3 laminectomy | Schwannoma | N | 1 | 4 | 15 | N |
| 20 | 42 F | T7–T9 laminectomy | Anaplastic ependymoma (WHO grade III) | N | 3 | 6 | 8 | N |
| 21 | 59 M | L1–L2 laminectomy | Metastatic melanoma | N | 1 | 2 | 4 | N |
| 22 | 63 M | T1–T5 laminectomy | Lipoma | N | 4 | 4 | 5 | N |
| 23 | 51 M | T1–T2 laminectomy | Schwannoma | N | 1 | 4 | 6 | N |
| 24 | 76 F | T8–T9 laminectomy | Meningioma | N | 1 | 4 | 5 | N |
| 25 | 6 2M | T9–10 laminectomy | Meningioma | N | 1 | 4 | 1 | N |
Abbreviations: FU, follow-up; LOD, length of drain; MIS, minimal invasive surgery; N, no; WHO, World Health Organization; Y, yes.
Note: All cases experienced primary closure of dura.
Fig. 1The relationship between the number of spinal levels involved in surgery and duration of the drain.
Fig. 2Daily drain output with time for patient no. 6.