Post-market safety patterns of hydrogel dural sealants: a comparative manufacturer and user facility device experience analysis.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of neurosurgical sciences Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-13 DOI:10.23736/S0390-5616.26.06744-5
Mokshal Porwal, Alan Mach, Stephen Jaffee, Alexander Yu
{"title":"Post-market safety patterns of hydrogel dural sealants: a comparative manufacturer and user facility device experience analysis.","authors":"Mokshal Porwal, Alan Mach, Stephen Jaffee, Alexander Yu","doi":"10.23736/S0390-5616.26.06744-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel dural sealants (DuraSeal, Adherus) reinforce dural closure, but case reports describe cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, infection, and swelling-related neurologic injury. We characterized post-market safety in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database, comparing structured problem codes with negation-aware narrative review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MAUDE reports from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2024, mentioning either device were extracted and deduplicated by unique identifiers (MDR_REPORT_KEY, REPORT_NUMBER). Structured FDA patient and device problem codes were mapped to clinical categories (CSF leak, infection, wound dehiscence, neurologic deficit, swelling/mass effect, polymerization/application issue, adhesion, reoperation/hospitalization). Narratives underwent deterministic, negation-aware screening for the same categories, and for each device we calculated event proportions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After deduplication, 279 reports were analyzed (256 DuraSeal, 23 Adherus). Most were coded as injury or malfunction; deaths were rare. CSF leak was the most frequent signal (DuraSeal 26.2% structured vs. 27.0% narrative; Adherus 52.2% vs. 47.8%). For DuraSeal, narrative review nearly doubled infection reports (8.2% vs. 19.9%) and identified swelling/mass effect (9.4%), neurologic deficit (4.3%), and reoperation/hospitalization (7.8%) largely absent from structured codes. For Adherus, narrative review identified isolated reports of infection, swelling/mass effect, and reoperation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEG hydrogel dural sealants show post-market safety patterns dominated by CSF leak, suspected infection, and swelling-related neurologic events. Exclusive reliance on structured MAUDE codes underestimates key complications. Integrating structured fields with negation-aware narrative review yields a more complete safety profile and supports cautious use in constrained intracranial spaces.</p>","PeriodicalId":16504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgical sciences","volume":" ","pages":"271-278"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0390-5616.26.06744-5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel dural sealants (DuraSeal, Adherus) reinforce dural closure, but case reports describe cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak, infection, and swelling-related neurologic injury. We characterized post-market safety in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database, comparing structured problem codes with negation-aware narrative review.

Methods: MAUDE reports from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2024, mentioning either device were extracted and deduplicated by unique identifiers (MDR_REPORT_KEY, REPORT_NUMBER). Structured FDA patient and device problem codes were mapped to clinical categories (CSF leak, infection, wound dehiscence, neurologic deficit, swelling/mass effect, polymerization/application issue, adhesion, reoperation/hospitalization). Narratives underwent deterministic, negation-aware screening for the same categories, and for each device we calculated event proportions.

Results: After deduplication, 279 reports were analyzed (256 DuraSeal, 23 Adherus). Most were coded as injury or malfunction; deaths were rare. CSF leak was the most frequent signal (DuraSeal 26.2% structured vs. 27.0% narrative; Adherus 52.2% vs. 47.8%). For DuraSeal, narrative review nearly doubled infection reports (8.2% vs. 19.9%) and identified swelling/mass effect (9.4%), neurologic deficit (4.3%), and reoperation/hospitalization (7.8%) largely absent from structured codes. For Adherus, narrative review identified isolated reports of infection, swelling/mass effect, and reoperation.

Conclusions: PEG hydrogel dural sealants show post-market safety patterns dominated by CSF leak, suspected infection, and swelling-related neurologic events. Exclusive reliance on structured MAUDE codes underestimates key complications. Integrating structured fields with negation-aware narrative review yields a more complete safety profile and supports cautious use in constrained intracranial spaces.

水凝胶硬膜密封胶上市后的安全模式:比较制造商和用户设施设备的经验分析。
背景:聚乙二醇(PEG)水凝胶硬脑膜密封剂(DuraSeal, Adherus)加强硬脑膜闭合,但病例报告描述脑脊液(CSF)泄漏,感染和肿胀相关的神经损伤。我们在美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)制造商和用户设施设备体验(MAUDE)数据库中描述了上市后的安全性,并将结构化问题代码与否定意识叙述性审查进行了比较。方法:提取2015年1月1日至2024年6月30日提及任一设备的MAUDE报告,并使用唯一标识符(MDR_REPORT_KEY, REPORT_NUMBER)进行重复数据删除。结构化的FDA患者和器械问题代码被映射到临床类别(脑脊液泄漏、感染、伤口开裂、神经功能缺损、肿胀/肿块效应、聚合/应用问题、粘连、再手术/住院)。叙事经历了确定性的,否定意识筛选相同类别,并为每个设备,我们计算事件的比例。结果:经重复数据删除后,279份报告被分析,其中DuraSeal 256份,Adherus 23份。大多数被编码为受伤或故障;死亡人数很少。脑脊液泄漏是最常见的信号(DuraSeal结构化26.2% vs叙述性27.0%;胶粘剂52.2% vs 47.8%)。对于DuraSeal,叙述性回顾几乎是感染报告的两倍(8.2%对19.9%),并确定了肿胀/肿块效应(9.4%),神经功能缺陷(4.3%)和再手术/住院(7.8%),这些在结构化代码中基本没有。对于阿戴留斯,叙述性回顾发现了感染、肿胀/肿块效应和再手术的孤立报告。结论:PEG水凝胶硬脑膜密封剂在上市后表现出以脑脊液泄漏、疑似感染和肿胀相关神经事件为主的安全模式。对结构化MAUDE代码的完全依赖低估了关键的复杂性。将结构化领域与否定意识叙事回顾相结合,产生更完整的安全性,并支持在受限的颅内空间中谨慎使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgical sciences
Journal of neurosurgical sciences CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
202
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgical Sciences publishes scientific papers on neurosurgery and related subjects (electroencephalography, neurophysiology, neurochemistry, neuropathology, stereotaxy, neuroanatomy, neuroradiology, etc.). Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of ditorials, original articles, review articles, special articles, letters to the Editor and guidelines. The journal aims to provide its readers with papers of the highest quality and impact through a process of careful peer review and editorial work.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书