The use of dural sealant patches for reinforcement of durotomy repair: a systematic review.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Rahul Shah, Shayan Huda, Max Ward, Randy S D'Amico, John Caridi, Netanel Ben-Shalom
{"title":"The use of dural sealant patches for reinforcement of durotomy repair: a systematic review.","authors":"Rahul Shah, Shayan Huda, Max Ward, Randy S D'Amico, John Caridi, Netanel Ben-Shalom","doi":"10.3171/2024.12.FOCUS24705","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dural sealant patches (DSPs) are a useful adjunct when closing the dura during cranial or spinal surgery to avoid cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage or infection. Authors of this paper systematically review the outcomes and incidence of CSF leakage and infection with the use of a DSP versus conventional practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched, and clinical trials and prospective or retrospective case-control and cohort studies with a low-risk of bias and involving any solid DSP used in adults for cranial or spinal cases were included. Studies that used a DSP in combination with another method of dural sealant closure, used a DSP as a dural substitute rather than an adjunctive closure device, or used hydrogel or polymer gel (i.e., nonsolid) dural sealant \"patches\" were excluded. A meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting outcomes relating to CSF leakage was performed together with a subgroup analysis for each DSP type. For comparative studies reporting outcomes relating to infection, a separate meta-analysis was conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across the 7 noncomparative studies included, 669 patients received TachoComb (n = 421, 1 study), TachoSil (n = 8, 1 study), Liqoseal (n = 40, 1 study), TissuePatchDural (n = 144, 2 studies), or Hemopatch (n = 56, 2 studies). Across the 6 comparative studies included, 1013 patients received TachoSil (n = 784, 3 studies), TissuePatchDural (n = 147, 2 studies), or Hemopatch (n = 82, 1 study). When considering the rates of CSF leakage or infection, 2/6 comparative studies found DSPs to be significantly more effective than current practice, while the remaining 4/6 demonstrated noninferiority compared to current practice. All studies considered the DSPs to be safe. A meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in the incidence of CSF leakage with the use of a DSP overall, but the improvements in CSF leak rates for the TachoSil and TissuePatchDural subgroups did not reach statistical significance. The single study evaluating Hemopatch did find statistically significant improvements in CSF leak rates. There were no significant differences in infection between the DSP groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was a significant improvement in the incidence of CSF leaks with the use of DSPs. Comparisons among DSP types and evaluations of outcomes relating to infection should be the focus of further research in this area.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"58 2","pages":"E11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.12.FOCUS24705","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Dural sealant patches (DSPs) are a useful adjunct when closing the dura during cranial or spinal surgery to avoid cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage or infection. Authors of this paper systematically review the outcomes and incidence of CSF leakage and infection with the use of a DSP versus conventional practice.

Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched, and clinical trials and prospective or retrospective case-control and cohort studies with a low-risk of bias and involving any solid DSP used in adults for cranial or spinal cases were included. Studies that used a DSP in combination with another method of dural sealant closure, used a DSP as a dural substitute rather than an adjunctive closure device, or used hydrogel or polymer gel (i.e., nonsolid) dural sealant "patches" were excluded. A meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting outcomes relating to CSF leakage was performed together with a subgroup analysis for each DSP type. For comparative studies reporting outcomes relating to infection, a separate meta-analysis was conducted.

Results: Across the 7 noncomparative studies included, 669 patients received TachoComb (n = 421, 1 study), TachoSil (n = 8, 1 study), Liqoseal (n = 40, 1 study), TissuePatchDural (n = 144, 2 studies), or Hemopatch (n = 56, 2 studies). Across the 6 comparative studies included, 1013 patients received TachoSil (n = 784, 3 studies), TissuePatchDural (n = 147, 2 studies), or Hemopatch (n = 82, 1 study). When considering the rates of CSF leakage or infection, 2/6 comparative studies found DSPs to be significantly more effective than current practice, while the remaining 4/6 demonstrated noninferiority compared to current practice. All studies considered the DSPs to be safe. A meta-analysis revealed significant improvements in the incidence of CSF leakage with the use of a DSP overall, but the improvements in CSF leak rates for the TachoSil and TissuePatchDural subgroups did not reach statistical significance. The single study evaluating Hemopatch did find statistically significant improvements in CSF leak rates. There were no significant differences in infection between the DSP groups.

Conclusions: There was a significant improvement in the incidence of CSF leaks with the use of DSPs. Comparisons among DSP types and evaluations of outcomes relating to infection should be the focus of further research in this area.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgical focus
Neurosurgical focus CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信