Omaditya Khanna, Glen D'Souza, Ellina Hattar-Medina, Michael Karsy, Rebecca C Chiffer, Thomas O Willcox, Christopher J Farrell, James J Evans
{"title":"硬膜内和硬膜外联合修复与单纯硬膜外修复腱鞘缺损的比较。","authors":"Omaditya Khanna, Glen D'Souza, Ellina Hattar-Medina, Michael Karsy, Rebecca C Chiffer, Thomas O Willcox, Christopher J Farrell, James J Evans","doi":"10.1055/a-1757-0328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective</b> Tegmen tympani or tegmen mastoideum defects involve dehiscence of the temporal bone that can be a source of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) otorrhea. Herein, we compare a combined intra-/extradural repair strategy with an extradural-only repair as it pertains to surgical and clinical outcomes. <b>Design</b> A retrospective review from our institution was performed of patients with tegmen defects requiring surgical intervention. <b>Participants</b> Patients with tegmen defects who underwent surgery (combined transmastoid and middle fossa craniotomy) for repair of tegmen defects between 2010 and 2020 were inclined in this study. <b>Results</b> A total of 60 patients with 40 intra-/extradural (mean follow-up time: 1,060 ± 1,103 days) and 20 extradural-only (mean follow-up time: 519 ± 369 days) repairs were identified. No major differences in demographic factors or presenting symptoms were identified between the two cohorts. There was no difference in hospital length of stay between the two patient cohorts (mean: 4.15 vs. 4.35 days, <i>p</i> = 0.8). In the extradural-only repair technique, synthetic bone cement was more frequently used (100 vs. 7.5%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), whereas in the combined intra-/extradural repair, synthetic dural substitute was used more often (80 vs. 35%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), with similar successful surgical outcomes achieved. Despite disparities in the techniques and materials used for repair, there were no differences in complication rates (wound infection, seizures, and ossicular fixation), 30-day readmission rates, or persistent CSF leak between the two treatment cohorts. <b>Conclusion</b> The results of this study suggest no difference in clinical outcomes between combined intra-/extradural versus extradural-only repair of tegmen defects. A simplified extradural-only repair strategy can be effective, and may reduce the morbidity of intradural reconstruction (seizures, stroke, and intraparenchymal hemorrhage).</p>","PeriodicalId":16513,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base","volume":"84 2","pages":"136-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9991520/pdf/10-1055-a-1757-0328.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Outcomes Using Combined Intra- and Extradural versus Extradural-Only Repair of Tegmen Defects.\",\"authors\":\"Omaditya Khanna, Glen D'Souza, Ellina Hattar-Medina, Michael Karsy, Rebecca C Chiffer, Thomas O Willcox, Christopher J Farrell, James J Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-1757-0328\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective</b> Tegmen tympani or tegmen mastoideum defects involve dehiscence of the temporal bone that can be a source of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) otorrhea. Herein, we compare a combined intra-/extradural repair strategy with an extradural-only repair as it pertains to surgical and clinical outcomes. <b>Design</b> A retrospective review from our institution was performed of patients with tegmen defects requiring surgical intervention. <b>Participants</b> Patients with tegmen defects who underwent surgery (combined transmastoid and middle fossa craniotomy) for repair of tegmen defects between 2010 and 2020 were inclined in this study. <b>Results</b> A total of 60 patients with 40 intra-/extradural (mean follow-up time: 1,060 ± 1,103 days) and 20 extradural-only (mean follow-up time: 519 ± 369 days) repairs were identified. No major differences in demographic factors or presenting symptoms were identified between the two cohorts. There was no difference in hospital length of stay between the two patient cohorts (mean: 4.15 vs. 4.35 days, <i>p</i> = 0.8). In the extradural-only repair technique, synthetic bone cement was more frequently used (100 vs. 7.5%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), whereas in the combined intra-/extradural repair, synthetic dural substitute was used more often (80 vs. 35%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), with similar successful surgical outcomes achieved. Despite disparities in the techniques and materials used for repair, there were no differences in complication rates (wound infection, seizures, and ossicular fixation), 30-day readmission rates, or persistent CSF leak between the two treatment cohorts. <b>Conclusion</b> The results of this study suggest no difference in clinical outcomes between combined intra-/extradural versus extradural-only repair of tegmen defects. A simplified extradural-only repair strategy can be effective, and may reduce the morbidity of intradural reconstruction (seizures, stroke, and intraparenchymal hemorrhage).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base\",\"volume\":\"84 2\",\"pages\":\"136-142\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9991520/pdf/10-1055-a-1757-0328.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1757-0328\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1757-0328","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的鼓膜被或乳突被缺损涉及颞骨开裂,可能是脑脊液耳漏的来源。在此,我们比较了硬膜内/硬膜外联合修复策略与单纯硬膜外修复策略,因为它们涉及到手术和临床结果。设计:对我院需要手术治疗的被膜缺损患者进行回顾性分析。2010年至2020年间接受手术(经乳突联合中窝开颅术)修复被膜缺损的患者在本研究中倾向。结果共60例患者进行了40例硬膜内/硬膜外修复(平均随访时间:1060±1103天)和20例硬膜外修复(平均随访时间:519±369天)。在两组人群中,没有发现人口统计学因素或出现症状方面的重大差异。两组患者的住院时间没有差异(平均:4.15天对4.35天,p = 0.8)。在纯硬膜外修复技术中,合成骨水泥的使用频率更高(100% vs. 7.5%, p p)。结论本研究的结果表明硬膜内/硬膜外联合修复与纯硬膜外修复的临床结果无差异。简化的硬膜外修复策略是有效的,并且可以减少硬膜内重建(癫痫、中风和脑实质出血)的发病率。
A Comparison of Outcomes Using Combined Intra- and Extradural versus Extradural-Only Repair of Tegmen Defects.
Objective Tegmen tympani or tegmen mastoideum defects involve dehiscence of the temporal bone that can be a source of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) otorrhea. Herein, we compare a combined intra-/extradural repair strategy with an extradural-only repair as it pertains to surgical and clinical outcomes. Design A retrospective review from our institution was performed of patients with tegmen defects requiring surgical intervention. Participants Patients with tegmen defects who underwent surgery (combined transmastoid and middle fossa craniotomy) for repair of tegmen defects between 2010 and 2020 were inclined in this study. Results A total of 60 patients with 40 intra-/extradural (mean follow-up time: 1,060 ± 1,103 days) and 20 extradural-only (mean follow-up time: 519 ± 369 days) repairs were identified. No major differences in demographic factors or presenting symptoms were identified between the two cohorts. There was no difference in hospital length of stay between the two patient cohorts (mean: 4.15 vs. 4.35 days, p = 0.8). In the extradural-only repair technique, synthetic bone cement was more frequently used (100 vs. 7.5%, p < 0.01), whereas in the combined intra-/extradural repair, synthetic dural substitute was used more often (80 vs. 35%, p < 0.01), with similar successful surgical outcomes achieved. Despite disparities in the techniques and materials used for repair, there were no differences in complication rates (wound infection, seizures, and ossicular fixation), 30-day readmission rates, or persistent CSF leak between the two treatment cohorts. Conclusion The results of this study suggest no difference in clinical outcomes between combined intra-/extradural versus extradural-only repair of tegmen defects. A simplified extradural-only repair strategy can be effective, and may reduce the morbidity of intradural reconstruction (seizures, stroke, and intraparenchymal hemorrhage).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base (JNLS B) is a major publication from the world''s leading publisher in neurosurgery. JNLS B currently serves as the official organ of several national and international neurosurgery and skull base societies.
JNLS B is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles, and technical notes covering all aspects of neurological surgery. The focus of JNLS B includes microsurgery as well as the latest minimally invasive techniques, such as stereotactic-guided surgery, endoscopy, and endovascular procedures. JNLS B is devoted to the techniques and procedures of skull base surgery.