• Journal of neurosurgery · May 2022

    A standardized model for in vitro testing of sutures and patches for watertight dural closure.

    • Florian Ebel, Stefan Wanderer, C Marvin Jesse, Ralph T Schär, Irena Zubak, Christian T Ulrich, and Andreas Raabe.
    • 1Department of Neurosurgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Switzerland.
    • J. Neurosurg. 2022 May 1; 136 (5): 148514941485-1494.

    ObjectiveCSF leaks are common complications of spinal and cranial surgeries. Several dural grafts and suture techniques are available to achieve watertight dural closure, but the effectiveness of these techniques remains unclear. The authors developed a standardized in vitro model to test available grafts and suture techniques alone or in combination to find the technique with the most watertight dural closure.MethodsA fluid chamber with a dural fixation device, infusion pump, pressure gauge, and porcine pericardium as a dural equivalent was assembled to provide the reusable device for testing. The authors performed dural closure in 4 different fashions, as follows: A) using running versus simple interrupted suture technique and different suture materials to close a 3-cm incision; B) selecting commonly used sealants and dural patches in combination with a running suture; C) performing duraplasty (1.5 × 1.5-cm square defect) with different dural substitutes in a stand-alone fashion; and D) performing duraplasty with different dural substitutes in a double-layer fashion. Each technique was tested 6 times. The hydrostatic burst pressure (BP) was measured and compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test or the Mann-Whitney U-test. Values are reported as mean ± SD.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the running and simple interrupted suture technique (p = 0.79). Adding a patch or sealant to a suture resulted in a 1.7- to 14-fold higher BP compared to solitary suture closure (36.2 ± 24.27 cm H2O and 4.58 ± 1.41 cm H2O, respectively; p < 0.001). The highest BP was achieved by adding DuraSeal or TachoSil (82.33 ± 12.72 cm H2O and 74.17 ± 12.64 cm H2O, respectively). For closing a square defect, using a double-layer duraplasty significantly increased BP by a factor of 4-12 compared to a single-layer duraplasty (31.71 ± 12.62 cm H2O vs 4.19 ± 0.88 cm H2O, respectively; p < 0.001). The highest BP was achieved with the combination of Lyomesh and TachoSil (43.67 ± 11.45 cm H2O).ConclusionsA standardized in vitro model helps to objectify the watertightness of dural closure. It allows testing of sutures and dural grafts alone or in combination. In the authors' testing, a running 6-0 monofilament polypropylene suture combined with DuraSeal or TachoSil was the technique achieving the highest BP. For the duraplasty of square defects, the double-layer technique showed the highest efficacy.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…