Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31552537›Full record

Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2020

No benefit of early versus late ambulation after incidental durotomy in lumbar spine surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Mazda Farshad, Alexander Aichmair, Florian Wanivenhaus, Michael Betz, Jose Spirig, David Ephraim Bauer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Complications after early versus late mobilization after an incidental durotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mazda FarshadUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland. mazda.farshad@balgrist.ch.
Alexander AichmairUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Florian WanivenhausUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Michael BetzUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jose SpirigUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
David Ephraim BauerUniversity Spine Center Zurich, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zurich, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIncidental 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.

methodsNinety-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.

resultsTwo 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.

conclusionThe 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). These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Postoperative CareBed RestCerebrospinal Fluid LeakDecompression, SurgicalDura MaterHumansIntraoperative ComplicationsLength of StayLumbar VertebraePostoperative ComplicationsWalkingBed restCerebro-spinal fluid leakageIncidental durotomyMobilization

Identifiers

PMID31552537
OpenAlexW2974959778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.