No benefit of early versus late ambulation after incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery: a randomized controlled trial
European Spine Journal, ISSN: 1432-0932, Vol: 29, Issue: 1, Page: 141-146
2020
- 18Citations
- 76Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations18
- Citation Indexes18
- 18
- CrossRef2
- Captures76
- Readers76
- 76
Article Description
Purpose: Incidental durotomy (ID) is a complication occurring in 4–17% of decompressive spinal surgeries. Persisting CSF leakage can occur even after ID repair and requires revision surgery. Prolonged flat bed rest (BR) to reduce the incidence of persisting CSF leakage is frequently applied but highly debated. A randomized controlled trial comparing prolonged BR versus early ambulation after ID repair is lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of revision surgery as a result of persistent cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) leakage and medical complications after immediate or late post-operative ambulation following ID during decompressive spinal surgery. Methods: Ninety-four of 1429 consecutive cases undergoing lumbar spine surgery (6.58%) were complicated by an ID. Sixty patients (mean age of 64 ± 13.28 years) were randomized to either early post-operative ambulation (EA, n = 30) or flat BR for 48 h (BR, n = 30). The incidence of CSF leakage resulting in revision surgery, medical complications and duration of hospitalization were compared between groups. Results: Two patients in the BR group and two patients in the EA group underwent revision surgery as a result of persisting CSF leakage. Four patients in the BR group experienced medical complications associated with prolonged immobilization. The duration of hospitalization was 7.25 ± 3.0 days in the BR group versus 6.56 ± 2.64 days in the EA group, p = 0.413. Conclusion: The results of this study indicate no benefit of prolonged BR after an adequately repaired ID in lumbar spine surgery. Level of evidence: Level 1b (individual randomized controlled trial). Graphic abstract: These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [Figure not available: see fulltext.].
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85073977362&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06144-5; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31552537; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00586-019-06144-5; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06144-5; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00586-019-06144-5
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know