522
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review Articles

Reconstruction strategies for intraoperative CSF leak in endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

, , , , , & show all
Pages 436-446 | Received 20 Jul 2020, Accepted 06 Nov 2020, Published online: 21 Jan 2021
 

Abstract

Background

Endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) is one of the preferred options for skull base pathologies. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak is a significant complication of EES and neurosurgeons have proposed various reconstructive strategies to decrease this morbidity. We describe and compare the efficacy of these strategies.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for publications between 1990 and November 2019. We defined a reconstruction hierarchy of seven levels from inside to outside: fat graft, intracranial intradural layer (inlay), intracranial extradural layer (onlay), buttress, mucosal flap, nasal packing and lumbar drainage. A single-arm analysis was performed for the primary outcome of CSF leak rate.

Results

Of 3641 records identified, 48 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pituitary tumors had lower postoperative CSF leak rate than other diseases (1.8% vs. 6.5%, RD = −4.7% [−7.1%, −2.1%]). In high CSF flow group, the post-operative leak rate was reduced by application of mucosal flap (4.3% vs. without mucosal flap at 12.8%, RD = −8.5% [−15.1%, −1.9%]). The use of inlay showed potential of decreasing the post-operative leak rate (5.0% vs. 7.2%, RD = −2.2% [−7.7%, 3.3%]). In low CSF flow group, tampon was better than balloon for nasal packing (1.0% vs. 10.5%, RD = −9.5% [−16.5%, −2.4%]).

Conclusions

Mucosal flap and inlay for high-flow intraoperative CSF leak and tampon (compared with balloon) for low-flow intraoperative CSF leak, improved the postoperative CSF leak rate. Further studies are required to establish more robust evidence.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Peiqing Cai, Wenjing Gou for their support in this research.

Disclosure statement

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers' bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 764.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.