Kinaci Ahmet, Algra Ale, Heuts Simon, O'Donnell Devon, van der Zwan Albert, van Doormaal Tristan
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Brain Technology Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
World Neurosurg. 2018 Oct;118:368-376.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.06.196. Epub 2018 Jun 30.
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage is one of the most challenging complications in neurosurgery. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of dural sealants in preventing CSF leakage after cranial surgery.
A literature search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The inclusion criteria were defined to include articles describing regular cranial procedures combined with the use of any dural sealant reporting CSF leakage. The primary outcome was CSF leakage (pseudomeningocele formation or incisional CSF leakage), secondary outcomes were pseudomeningocele formation, incisional CSF leakage, and surgical-site infection.
Twenty articles were included. Ten of these were comparative studies (sealant vs. no sealant) including 3 randomized controlled trials. In the 20 articles, a total of 3682 surgical procedures were reported. The number of CSF leakages in general did not differ between the sealant group (8.2%) and control group (8.4%), risk ratio (RR) 0.84 (0.50-1.42), I = 56%. Exclusion of non-randomized controlled trials did not alter the results. Meta-analyses for secondary outcomes showed no difference between number of incisional CSF leakage, RR 0.30 (0.05-1.59), I = 38%. Also, no difference was found in the pseudomeningocele formation, RR 1.50 (0.43-5.17), I = 0%. Surgical-site infection was seen less in the sealant group (1.0%) compared with the control group (5.6%), RR 0.25 (0.13-0.48), I = 0%.
This systematic review showed that dural sealants did not reduce the number of CSF leaks in general, the number of incisional CSF leaks alone, or the number of pseudomeningocele formations alone. However, dural sealants reduced the risk of surgical-site infection.
脑脊液漏是神经外科手术中最具挑战性的并发症之一。我们旨在评估硬脑膜封闭剂在预防颅脑手术后脑脊液漏方面的疗效。
在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane数据库中进行文献检索。纳入标准定义为包括描述常规颅脑手术联合使用任何硬脑膜封闭剂并报告脑脊液漏的文章。主要结局为脑脊液漏(假性脑膜膨出形成或切口脑脊液漏),次要结局为假性脑膜膨出形成、切口脑脊液漏和手术部位感染。
纳入20篇文章。其中10篇为比较研究(封闭剂组与无封闭剂组),包括3项随机对照试验。在这20篇文章中,共报告了3682例外科手术。总体而言,封闭剂组(8.2%)和对照组(8.4%)的脑脊液漏数量无差异,风险比(RR)为0.84(0.50 - 1.42),I² = 56%。排除非随机对照试验后结果未改变。次要结局的Meta分析显示,切口脑脊液漏数量无差异,RR为0.30(0.05 - 1.59),I² = 38%。此外,假性脑膜膨出形成方面也无差异,RR为1.50(0.43 - 5.17),I² = 0%。与对照组(5.6%)相比,封闭剂组的手术部位感染较少(1.0%),RR为0.25(0.13 - 0.48),I² = 0%。
本系统评价表明,硬脑膜封闭剂一般不会减少脑脊液漏的数量、单独的切口脑脊液漏数量或单独的假性脑膜膨出形成数量。然而,硬脑膜封闭剂可降低手术部位感染的风险。