ArticleAsian spine journal2022
Incidence of Dural Tears in Open versus Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Single-Center Prospective Study.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive tubular decompression versus traditional open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of Preoperative Epidural Spinal Injections on Complications After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Tubular spinal micro decompression surgery with integrated 2D camera visualization: initial experience and feasibility in Tanzania.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Imaging-Based Quantitative Assessment of Cage Migration After Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of diabetes mellitus on minimally invasive spine surgery outcome: A systematic review.Surgical neurology international · 2026Review
- Incorporating mixed reality head mounted display technology in biportal endoscopic lumbar surgery: an early feasibility study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of a novel high speed burr tip for safe and efficient bone surgery in a sheep model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Does incidental durotomy affect clinical outcome in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases after posterior open lumbar interbody fusion? a multicenter observational study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Observational
- The Utilization of Navigation and Emerging Technologies With Endoscopic Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review.Neurospine · 2025Article
- Application and research progress of tranexamic acid in the perioperative period of posterior lumbar interbody fusion.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Complications in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Last 10 Years: A Narrative Review.Neurospine · 2024Article
- Commentary on "Complications in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Last 10 Years: A Narrative Review".Neurospine · 2024Article
- Incidental Dural Tears During Lumbar Spine Surgery: Prevalence and Evaluation of Management Outcomes.Cureus · 2024Article
- Does Conventional Open TLIF cause more Muscle Injury when Compared to Minimally Invasive TLIF?-A Prospective Single Center Analysis.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Biportal endoscopic discectomy versus tubular microscopic discectomy for treating single-level lumbar disc herniation in obese patients: a multicenter, retrospective analysis.Acta neurochirurgica · 2023Article
- Recent Updates on Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: Techniques, Technologies, and Indications.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA prospective comparative study. PURPOSE: To compare the incidence of unintended durotomy and return to work after open surgery versus minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS) for degenerative lumbar pathologies. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The incidence of accidental durotomy varies between 0.3% and 35%. Most of these are from open surgeries, and only a handful of studies have involved the MIS approach. No single-center studies have compared open surgery with MIS, especially in the context of early return to work and dural tear (DT).
methodsThis study included 420 operated cases of degenerative lumbar pathology with a prospective follow-up of at least 6 months. Patients were divided into the open surgery and MIS groups, and the incidences of DT, early return to work, and various demographic and operative factors were compared.
resultsA total of 156 and 264 patients underwent MIS and open surgery, respectively. Incidental durotomy was documented in 52 cases (12.4%); this was significantly less in the MIS group versus the open surgery group (6.4% vs. 15.9%, p <0.05). In the open surgery group, four patients underwent revision for persistent dural leak or pseudomeningocele, but none of the cases in the MIS group had revision surgery due to DT-related complications. The incidence of DT was higher among patients with high body mass index, patients with diabetes mellitus, and patients who underwent revision surgery (p <0.05) regardless of the approach. The MIS group returned to work significantly earlier.
conclusionsMIS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of DT and earlier return to work compared with open surgery among patients with degenerative lumbar pathology.
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.