Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery—a three-nation survey to evaluate its management

  • Clinical Article - Spine
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Although it is generally accepted that incidental durotomies (ID) should be primarily repaired, the current literature shows no consensus regarding the peri- and postoperative management in case of ID during lumbar spine surgery. Because ID is a rather frequent complication and may be associated with significant disability, we were interested to analyze the current handling of ID in three European countries.

Methods

In March 2014, members of the Swiss, German, and Austrian neurosurgical and spine societies were asked to complete an online questionnaire regarding the management of ID during and after lumbar spine surgery. Two, respectively 4 weeks after the first invitation, reminder requests were sent to all invitees, who had not already responded at that time.

Results

There were 175 responses from 397 requests (44.1 %). Responders were predominantly neurosurgeons (89.7 %; 10.3 % were orthopedic surgeons), of which 45.7, 40.0, and 17.8 % work in a non-university hospital, university hospital, and private clinic, respectively. As for the perioperative management of ID, 19.4 % of the responders suggest only bed rest, while, depending on the extent of the ID, 84.0 % suggest additional actions, TachoSil/Spongostan with fibrin glue or a similar product and single suture repair being the most mentioned. Concerning epidural wound drainage in case of ID, 37.2 % desist from placing an epidural wound drainage with or without aspiration, 30.9 % place it sometimes, and 33.7 % place it regularly, but only without aspiration. Most responders prescribe bed rest for 24 (34.9 %) or 48 h (28.0 %), with much fewer prescribing bed rest for 72 h (6.3 %) and none more than 72 h, and 14.9 % of participants never prescribe bed rest. The vast majority of physicians (82.9 %, n = 145) always inform their patients after the operation in case of ID.

Conclusions

There is substantial heterogeneity in the management of incidental durotomies. The majority of spine surgeons today aim at complete/sufficient primary repair of the ID with varying recommendations concerning postoperative bed rest. Still, there is a trend towards early mobilization if the incidental durotomy has been closed completely/sufficiently with no participant favoring bed rest for more than 72 h.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 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 Joint Surg Am 74:536–543

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kalevski SK, Peev NA, Haritonov DG (2010) Incidental dural tears in lumbar decompressive surgery: incidence, causes, treatment, results. Asian J Neurosurg 5:54–59

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker GA, Cizik AM, Bransford RJ, Bellabarba C, Konodi MA, Chapman JR, Lee MJ (2012) Risk factors for unintended durotomy during spine surgery: a multivariate analysis. Spine J 12:121–126

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jankowitz BT, Atteberry DS, Gerszten PC, Karausky P, Cheng BC, Faught R, Welch WC (2009) Effect of fibrin glue on the prevention of persistent cerebral spinal fluid leakage after incidental durotomy during lumbar spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 18:1169–1174

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Khan MH, Rihn J, Steele G, Davis R, Donaldson WF 3rd, Kang JD, Lee JY (2006) Postoperative management protocol for incidental dural tears during degenerative lumbar spine surgery: a review of 3,183 consecutive degenerative lumbar cases. Spine 31:2609–2613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. McMahon P, Dididze M, Levi AD (2012) Incidental durotomy after spinal surgery: a prospective study in an academic institution. J Neurosurg Spine 17:30–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stromqvist F, Jonsson B, Stromqvist B, Swedish Society of Spinal S (2010) Dural lesions in lumbar disc herniation surgery: incidence, risk factors, and outcome. Eur Spine J 19:439–442

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams BJ, Sansur CA, Smith JS, Berven SH, Broadstone PA, Choma TJ, Goytan MJ, Noordeen HH, Knapp DR, Hart RA, Zeller RD, Donaldson WF, Polly DW, Perra JH, Boachie-Adjei O, Shaffrey CI (2011) Incidence of unintended durotomy in spine surgery based on 108,478 cases. Neurosurgery 68:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Desai A, Ball PA, Bekelis K, Lurie J, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN (2011) SPORT: does incidental durotomy affect long-term outcomes in cases of spinal stenosis? Neurosurgery 69:38–44

    Article  PubMed  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. Takahashi Y, Sato T, Hyodo H, Kawamata T, Takahashi E, Miyatake N, Tokunaga M (2013) Incidental durotomy during lumbar spine surgery: risk factors and anatomic locations: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 18:165–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Guerin P, El Fegoun AB, Obeid I, Gille O, Lelong L, Luc S, Bourghli A, Cursolle JC, Pointillart V, Vital JM (2012) Incidental durotomy during spine surgery: incidence, management and complications. A retrospective review. Injury 43:397–401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Desai A, Ball PA, Bekelis K, Lurie J, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD, Zhao W, Weinstein JN (2012) Surgery for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis in spine patient outcomes research trial: does incidental durotomy affect outcome? Spine 37:406–413

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Desai A, Ball PA, Bekelis K, Lurie JD, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN (2011) Outcomes after incidental durotomy during first-time lumbar discectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 14:647–653

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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 Joint Surg Am 80:1728–1732

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Espiritu MT, Rhyne A, Darden BV (2010) Dural tears in spine surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 18:537–545

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Miscusi M, Polli FM, Forcato S, Coman MA, Ricciardi L, Ramieri A, Raco A (2014) The use of surgical sealants in the repair of dural tears during non-instrumented spinal surgery. Eur Spine J. 2014. PMID 24384831

  20. Radcliff KE, Sidhu GD, Kepler CK, Gruskay J, Anderson DG, Hilibrand A, Albert TJ, Vaccaro AR (2013) Complications of flat bedrest following incidental dural repair. J Spinal Disord Tech. PMID 23197257

  21. Low JC, von Niederhausern B, Rutherford SA, King AT (2013) Pilot study of perioperative accidental durotomy: does the period of postoperative bed rest reduce the incidence of complication? Br J Neurosurg 27:800–802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ohana N, Kleir I (2005) Immediate mobilization following incidental durotomy in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 87-B:379

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eroes CA, Barth C, Tonn JC, Reulen HJ (2008) The revised European neurosurgical electronic logbook of operations. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 150:195–198

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lindsay K (2012) Accreditation of neurosurgical training programmes in Europe: report of JRAAC. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 154:947–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Omerhodzic I, Tonge M, Matos B, Musabeliu E, Raspanti C, Ferdinandov D, Galimova R, Muroi C, Balik V, Kursumovic A (2012) Neurosurgical training programme in selected European countries: from the young neurosurgeons’ point of view. Turk Neurosurg 22:286–293

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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 

  27. Hodges SD, Humphreys SC, Eck JC, Covington LA (1999) Management of incidental durotomy without mandatory bed rest. A retrospective review of 20 cases. Spine 24:2062–2064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Than KD, Wang AC, Etame AB, La Marca F, Park P (2008) Postoperative management of incidental durotomy in minimally invasive lumbar spinal surgery. Minim Invasive Neurosurg MIN 51:263–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Aebi M, Grob D (2004) SSE spine tango: a European spine registry promoted by the Spine Society of Europe (SSE). Eur Spine J 13:661–662

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Porchet F, Bartanusz V, Kleinstueck FS, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Grob D, Mannion AF (2009) Microdiscectomy compared with standard discectomy: an old problem revisited with new outcome measures within the framework of a spine surgical registry. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 3):360–366

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schluessmann E, Diel P, Aghayev E, Zweig T, Moulin P, Roder C, Group SWR (2009) SWISSspine: a nationwide registry for health technology assessment of lumbar disc prostheses. Eur Spine J 18:851–861

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors of this work thank all participants for having answered this survey.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Département de Neurosciences cliniques, Service de Neurochirurgie, Faculté de Médecine, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Rue Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil 4, 1211, Genève 14, Switzerland

    Oliver P. Gautschi, Marco V. Corniola, Enrico Tessitore & Karl Schaller

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Martin N. Stienen

  3. Department of Medicine, Frankston Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Nicolas R. Smoll

Authors
  1. Oliver P. Gautschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin N. Stienen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicolas R. Smoll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marco V. Corniola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Enrico Tessitore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karl Schaller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oliver P. Gautschi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gautschi, O.P., Stienen, M.N., Smoll, N.R. et al. Incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery—a three-nation survey to evaluate its management. Acta Neurochir 156, 1813–1820 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2177-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2177-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation