Systematic review evaluates dural tear incidence and bleeding management in endoscopic spine surgery, suggesting vital strategies for safety.
Study Design Systematic Review and Narrative Review. Objective To evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and management strategies for iatrogenic dural tears and to provide a narrative review of intraoperative bleeding management during uniportal and biportal endoscopic spine surgery (ESS). Methods A systematic literature search was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published between January 1990 and August 2025. Eligible studies included English-language clinical investigations involving degenerative spinal pathology treated with full-endoscopic or unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) techniques. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-E tool. Data on dural tear incidence and management were systematically synthesized, while bleeding control strategies were addressed through a structured narrative review of the technical literature. Results Nineteen studies including 10 578 patients were analyzed. The incidence of incidental durotomy ranged from 0.54% to 13.2%. Revision surgery was the strongest predictor of dural tears, followed by lumbar spinal stenosis and surgeon learning curve. Management strategies were stratified by defect size and containment: small tears were treated conservatively or with sealants; intermediate defects with patch techniques; and large or uncontained defects with endoscopic suturing or non-penetrating clips. The biportal approach facilitated complex dural repair. Bleeding management emphasized a prevention-first strategy focused on hemodynamic control, hydrostatic tamponade, and targeted use of radiofrequency and topical hemostatic agents. Conclusion Effective complication management in ESS requires adaptation to the hydrostatic environment. A stratified algorithm allows safe dural repair, while structured bleeding control is essential for maintaining visualization and surgical safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suvithayasiri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: