ArticleSurgical neurology international2021
Efficacy and safety of polyethylene glycol dural sealant system in cranial and spinal neurosurgical procedures: Meta-analysis.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- HemopatchNeurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2024Article
- Clinical management of dural defects: A review.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to assess the efficacy of polyethylene glycol (PEG) dura sealant to achieve watertight closure, prevention of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak and to investigate its possible side effects.
methodsWe searched Medline (through PubMed), Scopus, and the Cochrane Library through December 2019. We included articles demonstrating cranial or spinal procedures with the use of PEG material as a dural sealant. Data on intraoperative watertight closure, CSF leak, and surgical complications were extracted and pooled in a meta-analysis model using RevMan version 5.3 and OpenMeta (Analyst).
resultsPooling the controlled trials showed that PEG resulted in significantly more intraoperative watertight closures than standard care (risk ratio [RR] = 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.24, 1.66]). However, the combined effect estimate did not reveal any significant difference between both groups in terms of CSF leaks, the incidence of surgical site infections, and neurological deficits (
conclusionDura seal material is an acceptable adjuvant for dural closure when the integrity of the dura is questionable. However, marketing it as a factor for the prevention of surgical site infection is not scientifically proved. We suggest that, for neurosurgeons, using the dural sealants are highly recommended for duraplasty, skull base approaches, and in keyhole approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.