Direct Surgical Repair of Spontaneous Spinal CSF Leak: A Retrospective Canadian Cohort and Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal CSF leaks are a known cause of spontaneous intracranial hypotension, often presenting with orthostatic headaches and other neurological symptoms. While epidural blood patches are commonly used as initial treatment, many patients require surgery due to persistent symptoms. This study integrates a retrospective institutional cohort and a systematic literature review to evaluate the safety and efficacy of surgical dural repair for spontaneous spinal CSF leaks. METHODS: A retrospective chart review included all patients who underwent surgery for spontaneous spinal CSF leak at a Canadian center between June 2017 and December 2023. Clinical presentation, imaging findings, surgical approach and postoperative outcomes were assessed. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review identified studies reporting surgical management and outcomes for spinal CSF leaks. RESULTS: Forty patients (21 females, 19 males; mean age 50.48 ± 11.88 years) were included. Type 1 ventral dural CSF leaks predominated (72.5%), most commonly in the thoracic spine. Spinal longitudinal extradural collection and cranial stigmata were present in 70% and 75%, respectively. Microscopic direct dural repair led to clinical improvement in 82.5%, with headache resolution or improvement in 85.72%. The complication rate was 7.5% with all complications being transient. The systematic review included 20 studies (483 patients), reporting an 84.06% pooled surgical success rate, with transient complications most common in direct suturing techniques. CONCLUSION: Surgical repair is a safe and effective treatment for spontaneous spinal CSF leaks, particularly in patients with failed conservative treatment. Favorable outcomes support early, anatomically guided surgical intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".