硬脑膜密封补片在硬脑膜切开修补中的应用:系统回顾。

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":"硬脑膜密封补片在硬脑膜切开修补中的应用:系统回顾。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的:硬脑膜密封贴片(DSPs)是颅脑或脊柱外科手术中封闭硬脑膜的有效辅助手段,可避免脑脊液(CSF)渗漏或感染。本文的作者系统地回顾了与传统做法相比,使用DSP的结果和脑脊液泄漏和感染的发生率。方法:检索MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane Library和Scopus数据库,纳入低风险偏倚的临床试验、前瞻性或回顾性病例对照和队列研究,并纳入成人颅脑或脊柱病例中使用的任何固体DSP。将DSP与另一种硬脑膜密封剂联合使用,将DSP作为硬脑膜的替代品而不是辅助封闭装置,或使用水凝胶或聚合物凝胶(即非固体)硬脑膜密封剂“贴片”的研究均被排除在外。对报告脑脊液渗漏相关结果的比较研究进行荟萃分析,并对每种DSP类型进行亚组分析。对于报告感染相关结果的比较研究,进行了单独的荟萃分析。结果:在纳入的7项非比较研究中,669名患者接受了TachoComb (n = 421, 1项研究)、TachoSil (n = 8, 1项研究)、Liqoseal (n = 40, 1项研究)、tissuepatchural (n = 144, 2项研究)或Hemopatch (n = 56, 2项研究)。在纳入的6项比较研究中,1013名患者接受了TachoSil (n = 784, 3项研究)、TissuePatchDural (n = 147, 2项研究)或Hemopatch (n = 82, 1项研究)。当考虑到脑脊液渗漏或感染的发生率时,2/6的比较研究发现dsp明显比目前的做法更有效,而剩下的4/6显示与目前的做法相比无劣效性。所有的研究都认为dsp是安全的。一项荟萃分析显示,使用DSP总体上显著改善了脑脊液泄漏的发生率,但在TachoSil和tissuepatchural亚组中脑脊液泄漏率的改善没有达到统计学意义。评估血片的单一研究确实发现脑脊液泄漏率在统计学上有显著改善。两组间感染无显著性差异。结论:使用dsp可显著降低脑脊液渗漏的发生率。DSP类型的比较和感染相关结果的评估应是该领域进一步研究的重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The use of dural sealant patches for reinforcement of durotomy repair: a systematic review.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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