Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Complications after early versus late mobilization after an incidental durotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 31 January 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

An incidental durotomy (IDT) is a frequent complication of spinal surgery. The conventional management involving a period of flat bed rest is highly debatable. Indeed, there are scanty data and no consensus regarding the need or ideal duration of post-operative bed rest following IDT.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the literature regarding the outcomes of mobilization within 24 h and after 24 h following IDT in open lumbar or thoracic surgery with respect to the length of hospital stay, minor and major complications.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane and dating up until September 2022 was undertaken following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Quality of evidence was assessed using a modified version of Sackett's Criteria of Evidence Support.

Results

Out of 532 articles, 6 studies met the inclusion criteria (1 Level-I, 4 level-III and 1 Level-IV evidence) and were analyzed. Overall, 398 patients of mean age 59.9 years were mobilized within 24 h. The average length of stay (LOS) for this group was 5.7 days. Thirty-four patients (8.5%) required reoperation while the rate of minor complications was 25.4%. Additionally, 265 patients of mean age 63 years with IDT were mobilized after 24 h. The average LOS was 7.8 days. Twenty patients (7.54%) required reoperation while the rate of minor complications was 55%. Meta-analysis comparing early to late mobilization, showed a significant reduction in the risk of minor complications and shorter overall LOS due to early mobilization, but no significant difference in major complications and reoperation rates.

Conclusions

Although early mobilization after repaired incidental dural tears in open lumbar and thoracic spinal surgery has a similar major complication/ reoperation rates compared to late mobilization, it significantly decreases the risk of minor complications and length of hospitalization.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Change history

References

  1. Sin AH, Caldito G, Smith D et al (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 

  2. Cammisa FP Jr, Girardi FP, Sangani PK et al (2000) Incidental durotomy in spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2663–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Guerin P, El Fegoun AB, Obeid I et al (2011) Incidental durotomy during spine surgery: Incidence, management and complications. A ret- rospective review. Injury 43:397–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Epstein NE (2007) The frequency and etiology of intraoperative dural tears in 110 predominantly geriatric patients undergoing multilevel laminectomy with noninstrumented fusions. J Spinal Disord Tech 20:380–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bosacco SJ, Gardner MJ, Guille JT (2001) Evaluation and treatment of dural tears in lumbar spine surgery: a review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 389:238–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD et al (1992) Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine the influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74(4):536–543

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rampersaud YR, Moro ER, Neary MA et al (2006) Intraoperative adverse events and related postoperative complications in spine surgery: implications for enhancing patient safety founded on evidence-based protocols. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(13):1503–1510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hodges SD, Humphreys SC, Eck JC et al (1999) Management of incidental durotomy without mandatory bed rest. A retrospective review of 20 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24(19):2062–2064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Low JC, von Niederhäusern B, Rutherford SA et al (2013) Pilot study of perioperative accidental durotomy: does the period of postoperative bed rest reduce the incidence of complication? Br J Neurosurg 27(6):800–802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Connor D, Maskery N, Griffiths WE (1998) Pseudomeningocele nerve root entrapment after lumbar discectomy. Spine 23:1501–1502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Koo J, Adamson R, Wagner FC Jr et al (1989) A new cause of chronic men- ingitis: Infected lumbar pseudomeningocele. Am J Med 86:103–104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Verner EF, Musher DM (1985) Spinal epidural abscess. Med Clin North Am 69:375–384

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Papavero L, Engler N, Kothe R (2015) Incidental durotomy in spine surgery: first aid in ten steps. Eur Spine J 24:2077–2084

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cain JE Jr, Dryer RF, Barton BR (1988) Evaluation of dural closure techniques. Suture methods, fibrin adhesive sealant, and cyanoacrylate polymer. Spine 13(7):720–725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Green AL, Arnaud A, Batiller J et al (2014) A multicentre, prospective, randomized, controlled study to evaluate the use of a fibrin sealant as an adjunct to sutured dural repair. Br J Neurosurg 29:11–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Narotam PK, Reddy K, Fewer D et al (2007) Colla- gen matrix duraplasty for cranial and spinal surgery: a clinical and imaging study. J Neurosurg 106(1):45–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tafazal SI, Sell PJ (2005) Incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery: incidence and management. Eur Spine J 14(3):287–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Clajus C, Stockhammer F, Rohde V (2015) The intra- and postop- erative management of accidental durotomy in lumbar spine sur- gery: results of a German survey. Acta Neurochir 157(3):525–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Allen C, Glasziou P, Del Mar C (1999) Bed rest: a potentially harmful treatment needing more careful evaluation. Lancet 354:1229–1233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Parry SM, Puthucheary ZA (2015) The impact of extended bed rest on the musculoskeletal system in the critical care environment. Extrem Physiol Med [Internet] 4(1):16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M et al (2015) PRISMA-P group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. Syst Rev 4:1–9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J et al (eds) (2021) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions; version 6.2. Cochrane, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  25. Verma K, Freelin AH, Atkinson KA et al (2022) Early mobilization versus bed rest for incidental durotomy: an institutional cohort study. J Neurosurg Spine 18:1–6. https://doi.org/10.3171/2022.1.SPINE211208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Farshad M, Aichmair A, Wanivenhaus F et al (2020) No benefit of early versus late ambulation after incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J 29(1):141–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kögl N, Schenk L, Preuss Hernandez C et al. (2020) Bed rest after incidental durotomy in lumbar surgery. A redundant measure in case of watertight dural repair. J Neurosurg Sci. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0390-5616.20.05143-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Robson CH, Paranathala MP, Dobson G et al (2018) Early mobilisation does not increase the complication rate from unintended lumbar durotomy. Br J Neurosurg 4:1–3

    Google Scholar 

  29. Radcliff KE, Sidhu GD, Kepler CK et al (2016) Complications of flat bed rest after incidental durotomy. Clin Spine Surg 7:281–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chen Z, Shao P, Sun Q et al (2015) Risk factors for incidental durotomy during lumbar surgery: a retrospective study by multivariate analysis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 130(2015):101–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Williams BJ, Sansur CA, Smith JS et al (2011) Incidence of unintended durotomy in spine surgery based on 108 478 cases. Neurosurgery 68(1):117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Baker GA, Cizik AM, Bransford RJ et al (2012) Risk factors for unintended durotomy during spine surgery: a multivariate analysis. Spine J 12(2):121–126

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Francavilla TL, Weiss MC, Davis R (2019) Safe discharge of patients from an ambulatory care center after incidental durotomy during minimally invasive spine surgery. Int J Spine Surg 13(4):386–391

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kamenova M, Leu S, Mariani L et al (2016) Management of incidental dural tear during lumbar spine surgery: to suture or not to suture? World Neurosurg 87:455–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jankowitz BT, Atteberry DS, Gerszten PC et al (2009) Effect of fibrin glue on the prevention of persistent cerebral spinal fluid leakage after incidental durotomy during lumbar spinal surgery. Eur Spine J [Internet] 18(8):1169–1174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Couture D, Branch CL Jr (2003) Spinal pseudomeningoceles and cerebrospinal fluid fistulas. Neurosurg Focus 15(6):E6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Harper CM, Lyles YM (1988) Physiology and complications of bed rest. J Am Geriatr Soc 36(11):1047–1054

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Puvanesarajah V, Hassanzadeh H (2017) The true cost of a dural tear: medical and economic ramifications of incidental durotomy during lumbar discectomy in elderly medicare beneficiaries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42:770–776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yoshihara H, Yoneoka D (2013) Incidental dural tear in lumbar spinal decompression and discectomy: analysis of a nationwide database. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133:1501–1508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT (2020) Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Syn Meth. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1411

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Spinal Studies and Surgery, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK

    Elie Najjar, Mohamed A. Hassanin, Spyridon Komaitis, Faris Karouni & Nasir Quraishi

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Assiut University, Asyut, Egypt

    Mohamed A. Hassanin

Authors
  1. Elie Najjar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed A. Hassanin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Spyridon Komaitis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Faris Karouni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nasir Quraishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

EN and NQ contributed to the study conception and design. Data collection and analysis were performed by EN and AM. The first draft of the manuscript was written by EN and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. Final version of the article reviewed by NQ and SK.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Spyridon Komaitis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Code availability

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Najjar, E., Hassanin, M.A., Komaitis, S. et al. Complications after early versus late mobilization after an incidental durotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 32, 778–786 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07526-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07526-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation