Literature DB >> 35378616

Dural substitutes for spina bifida repair: past, present, and future.

Marcos M Miyabe1, Kendall P Murphy1,2, Marc Oria1,3,4, Soner Duru1, Chia-Ying Lin2, Jose L Peiro5,6,7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The use of materials to facilitate dural closure during spina bifida (SB) repair has been a highly studied aspect of the surgical procedure. The overall objective of this review is to present key findings pertaining to the success of the materials used in clinical and pre-clinical studies. Additionally, this review aims to aid fetal surgeons as they prepare for open or fetoscopic prenatal SB repairs.
METHODS: Relevant publications centered on dural substitutes used during SB repair were identified. Important information from each article was extracted including year of publication, material class and sub-class, animal model used in pre-clinical studies, whether the repair was conducted pre-or postnatally, the bioactive agent delivered, and key findings from the study.
RESULTS: Out of 1,121 publications, 71 were selected for full review. We identified the investigation of 33 different patches where 20 and 63 publications studied synthetic and natural materials, respectively. From this library, 43.6% focused on clinical results, 36.6% focused on pre-clinical results, and 19.8% focused on tissue engineering approaches. Overall, the use of patches, irrespective of material, have shown to successfully protect the spinal cord and most have shown promising survival and neurological outcomes.
CONCLUSION: While most have shown significant promise as a therapeutic strategy in both clinical and pre-clinical studies, none of the patches developed so far are deemed perfect for SB repair. Therefore, there is an opportunity to develop new materials and strategies that aim to overcome these challenges and further improve the outcomes of SB patients.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dural substitute; Myelomeningocele; Patch; Pediatric; Spina bifida

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35378616     DOI: 10.1007/s00381-022-05486-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst        ISSN: 0256-7040            Impact factor:   1.475


  42 in total

Review 1.  Salvage of a complicated myelomeningocele using collagen (Duragen) and dermal (Alloderm) matrix substitutes. Case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Vladimir Grigoryants; John A Jane; Kant Y Lin
Journal:  Pediatr Neurosurg       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.162

2.  Reconstruction of the dural canal in myelomeningocele. Case report.

Authors:  A D Bartal; Y D Heilbronn; Y Y Plashkes
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1971-01       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Silastic dural substitute: experience of its use in spinal and foramen magnum surgery.

Authors:  D N Thompson; W F Taylor; R D Hayward
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.596

4.  Reducing perinatal complications and preterm delivery for patients undergoing in utero closure of fetal myelomeningocele: further modifications to the multidisciplinary surgical technique.

Authors:  Kelly A Bennett; Mary Anne Carroll; Chevis N Shannon; Stephane A Braun; Mary E Dabrowiak; Alicia K Crum; Ray L Paschall; Ann L Kavanaugh-McHugh; John C Wellons; Noel B Tulipan
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 2.375

5.  Successful management of a small infant born with a large meningomyelocele using a temporary artificial dermis.

Authors:  Hiroaki Nakazawa; Yuji Kikuchi; Takashi Honda; Tsukasa Isago; Motohiro Nozaki
Journal:  Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg       Date:  2005

6.  The use of a reconstituted collagen foil dura mater substitute in paediatric neurosurgical procedures--experience in 47 patients.

Authors:  Benedetta Ludovica Pettorini; Gianpiero Tamburrini; Luca Massimi; Giovanna Paternoster; Massimo Caldarelli; Concezio Di Rocco
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.596

7.  A randomized trial of prenatal versus postnatal repair of myelomeningocele.

Authors:  N Scott Adzick; Elizabeth A Thom; Catherine Y Spong; John W Brock; Pamela K Burrows; Mark P Johnson; Lori J Howell; Jody A Farrell; Mary E Dabrowiak; Leslie N Sutton; Nalin Gupta; Noel B Tulipan; Mary E D'Alton; Diana L Farmer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Percutaneous fetoscopic patch coverage of spina bifida aperta in the human--early clinical experience and potential.

Authors:  Thomas Kohl; Rudolph Hering; Axel Heep; Carlo Schaller; Bernhard Meyer; Claudia Greive; Gabriele Bizjak; Tim Buller; Patricia Van de Vondel; Wiebke Gogarten; Peter Bartmann; Gisela Knopfle; Ulrich Gembruch
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.587

9.  Surgical considerations in the initial repair of meningomyelocele and the introduction of a technical modification.

Authors:  J L Venes
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 4.654

10.  Closure of Myelomeningocele Defects Using a Limberg Flap or Direct Repair.

Authors:  Jung-Hwan Shim; Na-Hyun Hwang; Eul-Sik Yoon; Eun-Sang Dhong; Deok-Woo Kim; Sang-Dae Kim
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2016-01-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.