Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Dural lesions in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: incidence, risk factors and effect on outcome

  • Eurospine Full Paper Award 2011
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the most frequent operations on the spine today. The most common complication seems to be a peroperative dural lesion. There are few prospective studies on this complication regarding incidence and effect on long-term outcome; this is the background for the current study.

Materials and methods

Swespine, the Swedish Spine Register documents the majority (>80%) of lumbar spine operations in Sweden today. Within the framework of this register, totally 3,699 operations for spinal stenosis during a 5-year period were studied regarding complications and 1-year postoperative outcome. Mean patient age was 66 (37–92) years and 44% were males. Fourteen percent were smokers and 19% had undergone previous lumbar spine surgery.

Results

The overall incidence of a peroperative dural lesion was 7.4%, 8.5% of patients undergoing decompressive surgery only and 5.5% of patients undergoing decompressive surgery + fusion (p < 0.001). A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that (high) age (p < 0.0004), previous surgery (p < 0.036) and smoking (p < 0.049) were significantly predictive factors for dural lesions. An odds ratio estimate demonstrated an age-related risk increase with 2.7% per year. The risk for dural lesions also increased with number of levels decompressed. The 1-year outcome was identical in the two groups with and without a dural lesion.

Conclusion

A dural lesion was seen in 7.4% of decompressive operations for spinal stenosis. High age, previous surgery and smoking were risk factors for sustaining a lesion, which, however, did not affect the 1-year outcome negatively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, Deyo RA, Singer DE (2005) Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the maine lumbar spine study. Spine 30(8):936–943

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cain JE Jr, Lauermann WC, Rosenthal HG, Broom MJ, Jacobs RR (1991) The histomorphologic sequence of dural repair. Observations in the canine model. Spine 16(Suppl):S319–S323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cammisa FP, Girardi FP, Sangani PK, Parvataneni HK, Cadag S, Sandhu HS (2000) Incidental durotomy in spine surgery. Spine 25(20):2663–2667

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ, Ciol MA (1992) Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine: the influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure. J Bone Jt Surg Am A 74:536–543

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Martin BI, Kreuter W, Goodman DC, Jarvik JG (2011) Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults. JAMA 303(13):1259–1265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Eismont FJ, Wiesel SW, Rothman RH (1981) Treatment of dural tears associated with spinal surgery. J Bone Jt Surg Am A 63:1132–1136

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fu KMG, Smith JS, Polly DW Jr, Perra JH, Sansur CA, Berven SH, Broadstone PA, Choma TJ, Goytan MJ, Noordeen HH, Knapp DR Jr, Hart RA, Zeller RD, Donaldson WF III, Boachie-Adjei O, Shaffrey CI (2010) Morbidity and mortality in the surgical treatment of 10, 329 adults with degenerative lumbar stenosis. J Neurosurg Spine 12:443–446

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jones AA, Stambough JL, Balderston RA, Rothman RH, Booth RE (1989) Long-term results of lumbar spine surgery complicated by unintended incidental durotomy. Spine 14(4):443–446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jönsson B, Sjöberg C, Annertz M, Strömqvist B (1997) A prospective and consecutive study of surgically treated lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II: five-year follow-up by an independent observer. Spine 22(24):2938–2944

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kitchel SH, Eismont FJ, Green BA (1989) Closed subarachnoid drainage for management of cerebrospinal fluid leakage after an operation on the spine. J Bone Jt Surg Am A 71:984–987

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sin AH, Caldito G, Smith D, Rashidi M, Willis B, Nanda A (2006) Predictive factors for dural tear and cerebrospinal fluid leakage in patients undergoing lumbar surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 5:224–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Stewart G, Sachs BL (1996) Patient outcomes after reoperation on the lumbar spine. J Bone Jt Surg Am A 78:706–711

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Stolke D, Sollman WP, Seifert V (1989) Intra- and postoperative complications in lumbar disc surgery. Spine 14:56–59

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B (2005) One-year report from the Swedish National Spine Register. Swedish Society of Spinal Surgeons. Acta Orthop 76(Suppl 319):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Strömqvist B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Jönsson B, Swedish Society of Spinal Surgeons (2009) The Swedish Spine Register: development, design and utility. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 3):S294–S304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Strömqvist F, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B (2010) Dural lesions in lumbar disc herniation surgery: incidence, risk factors, and outcome. Eur Spine J 19:439–442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Thomé C, Zevgaridis D, Leheta O, Bäzner H, Pöckler-Schöniger C, Wöhrle J, Schmiedek P (2005) Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 3:129–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Deyo R (1992) Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine 17:1–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang JC, Bohlman HH, Riew KD (1998) Dural tears secondary to operations on the lumbar spine management and results after a two-year-minimum follow-up of eighty-eight patients. J Bone Jt Surg Am A 80:1728–1732

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Hanscom B, Skinner JS, Abdu WA, Hilibrand AS, Boden SD, Deyo RA (2006) Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA 296:2441–2450

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Blood E, Hanscom B, Herkowitz H, Cammisa F, Albert T, Boden SD, Hilibrand A, Goldberg H, Berven S, AnH SPORT investigators (2008) Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. New Engl J Med 358(8):794–810

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors highly appreciate statistical help and advice given by Caddie Zhou at the National Centre for Quality Registers, Lund Sweden. The economical funding by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) is also acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Björn Strömqvist.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Strömqvist, F., Jönsson, B., Strömqvist, B. et al. Dural lesions in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: incidence, risk factors and effect on outcome. Eur Spine J 21, 825–828 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2101-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2101-2

Keywords

Navigation