Advertisement

European Spine Journal

, Volume 19, Issue 12, pp 2216–2222 | Cite as

Early postoperative MRI in detecting hematoma and dural compression after lumbar spinal decompression: prospective study of asymptomatic patients in comparison to patients requiring surgical revision

  • Massimo A. Leonardi
  • M. Zanetti
  • N. Saupe
  • K. Min
Original Article

Abstract

Early postoperative MRI after spinal surgery is difficult to interpret because of confounding postoperative mass effects and frequent occurrence of epidural hematomas. Purpose of this prospective study is to evaluate prevalence, extent and significance of hematoma in the first postoperative week in asymptomatic patients after decompression for lumbar stenosis and to determine the degree of clinically significant dura compression by comparing with the patients with postoperative symptoms. MRI was performed in 30 asymptomatic patients (47 levels) in the first week after lumbar spine decompression for degenerative stenosis. Eleven patients requiring surgical revision (16 levels) for symptomatic early postoperative hematoma were used for comparison. In both groups the cross-sectional area of the maximum dural compression (bony stenosis and dural sac expansion) was measured preoperatively and postoperatively by an experienced radiologist. Epidural hematoma was seen in 42.5% in asymptomatic patients (20/47 levels). The median area of postoperative hematoma at the operated level was 176 mm2 in asymptomatic patients and 365 mm2 in symptomatic patients. The median cross-sectional area of the dural sac at the operated level was 128.5 and 0 mm2 in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively, at the site of maximal compression. In the symptomatic group 75% of the patients had a maximal postoperative dural sac area of 58.5 mm2 or less, whereas in the asymptomatic group 75% of patients with epidural hematoma had an area of 75 mm2 or more. The size of hematoma and the degree of dural sac compression were significantly larger in patients with symptoms needing surgical revision. Dural sac area of less than 75 mm2 in early postoperative MRI was found to be the threshold for clinical significance.

Keywords

Epidural hematoma Early postoperative MRI Spinal stenosis Neural compression 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Sarah Haile, PhD in statistical analyses.

References

  1. 1.
    Awad KN, Kebaish KM, Donigan J, Cohen DB, Kostuik JP (2005) Analysis of risk factors for the development of post-operative spinal epidural haematoma. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87-B:1248–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kebaish KM, Awad JN (2004) Spinal epidural hematoma causing acute cauda equina syndrome. Neurosurg Focus 16(6):e1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kou J, Fischgrund J, Biddinger A, Herkowitz H (2002) Risk factors for spinal epidural hematoma after spinal surgery. Spine 27(15):1670–1673CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lawton MT, Porter RW, Heiserman JE et al (1995) Surgical management of spinal epidural hematoma: relationship between surgical timing an neurological outcome. J Neurosurg 83:1–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Awwad EE, Smith KR (1999) MRI of marked dural sac compression by surgicel in the immediately postoperative period after uncomplicated lumbar laminectomy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23(6):969–975CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ross JS, Masaryk TJ, Modic MT, Bohlman H, Delamater R, Wilber G (1987) Lumbar spine: postoperative assessment with surface-coil MR imaging. Radiology 164:851–860PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kotilainen E, Alanen A, Erkintalo M, Helenius H, Valtonen S (1994) Postoperative hematomas after successful lumbar microdiscectomy or percutaneous nucleotomy: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Surg Neurol 41:98–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sokolovsky MJ, Garvey TA, Perl John II, Sokolovsky MA, Cho W, Mehbod AA, Dykes DC, Transfeldt EE (2008) Prospective study of postoperative lumbar epidural hematoma: incidence and risk factors. Spine 33(1):108–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sokolovsky MJ, Garvey TA, Perl J et al (2008) Postoperative lumbar epidural hematoma: does size really matter? Spine 33(1):114–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dina TS, Boden SD, Davis DO (1995) Lumbar spine after surgery for herniated disk: imaging findings in the early postoperative period. AJR 164(3):665–671PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Montaldi S, Frankhauser H, Schnyder P, de Tribolet N (1988) Computed tomography of postoperative intervertebral disc and lumbar spinal canal: investigation of twenty-five patients after successful operation for lumbar disc herniation. Neurosurgery 22:1014–1021CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ikuta K, Tono O, Tanaka T, Arima J, Nakano S, Sasaki K, Oga M (2006) Evaluation of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma after microendoscopic posterior decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurosurg Spine 5:404–409CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schönstrom NS, Bolender NF, Spengler DM (1984) Pressure changes within the cauda equine following constriction of dura sac: an in vitro experimental study. Spine 9:604–607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schönstrom N, Hansson T (1988) Pressure changes following constriction of the cauda equine: an experimental study in situ. Spine 13:385–388CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bolender NF, Schönstöm NSR, Spengler DM (1985) Role of computed tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of the central spinal stenosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 67:240–246Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Speciale AC, Pietrobon R, Urban C et al (2002) Observer variability in assessing lumbar spinal stenosis severity on magnetic resonance imaging and its relation to cross-sectional spinal canal area. Spine 27(10):1082–1086CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamanishi C, Matukura N, Fujita M, Tomihara M, Tanaka S (1994) Cross-sectional area of the stenotic dural tube measured from transverse views of magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord 7(5):388–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T (1994) Computed tomography after laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 19(17):1975–1978CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mariconda M, Zanforlino G, Celestino G, Brancaleone S, Fava R, Milano C (2000) Factors influencing the outcome of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 13(2):131–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Willen J, Danielson B, Gaulitz A, Niklason T, Schönström N, Hansson T (1997) Dynamic effects on the lumbar spinal canal. Axially loaded CT-myelography and MRI in patients with sciatica and/or neurogenic claudication. Spine 22(24):2968–2976Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ogikubo O, Forsberg L, Hansson T (2007) The relationship between the cross-sectional area of the cauda equina and the preoperative symptoms in central lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 32(13):1423–1428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Massimo A. Leonardi
    • 1
  • M. Zanetti
    • 2
  • N. Saupe
    • 2
  • K. Min
    • 1
  1. 1.Balgrist Clinic, Department of OrthopedicsUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Balgrist Clinic, Department of RadiologyUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations