• Hyun-Jin Park, Seung-Kook Kim, Su-Chan Lee, Wanseok Kim, Sangho Han, and Sang-Soo Kang.
• Department of Spine Center, Orthopaedic Surgery, Hallym University Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
• World Neurosurg. 2020 Apr 1; 136: e578-e585.

ObjectiveTo determine the rate and anatomical location of dural tears associated with spinal surgery using a percutaneous biportal endoscopic surgery (PBES) technique. We investigated the relationship between dural tears and the type of procedure and type of instrument used.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 643 PBES cases by reviewing the medical records, operative records, and operative videos. Incidental durotomy was identified in 29 cases. We analyzed the size and anatomical location of the dural tears, the surgical instrument that caused the tear, and the technique used to seal the tear.ResultsThe dural tear incidence was 4.5% (29 of 643 cases). Tears in the exiting nerve area (2 cases; 6.9%) had mainly been caused by curettage, tears in the thecal sac area (18 cases; 62.1%) were associated with electric drill and forceps use; and tears in the traversing nerve area were associated with the use of a Kerrison punch (9 cases; 31%). Of the 29 cases of dural tear, 12 were treated with in-hospital monitoring and bed rest, 14 were treated with a fibrin sealant, 2 were treated with a nonpenetrating titanium clip, and 1 was converted to microscopic surgery. One case of postoperative meningocele after conservative treatment required endoscopic revision surgery to close the dural tear.ConclusionsMost cases of incidental dural tear during PBES were treated with an endoscopic procedure. The incidence of dural tear was no greater than that associated with microscopic surgery. Our management strategy for incidental dural tears during PBES has been shown to be safe and effective.Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…