Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleMinimally Invasive Surgery

Preoperative Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection Increases the Risk of a Dural Tear During Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy

Akash Shakya, Ayush Sharma, Vijay Singh, Amisha Rathore, Vinayak Garje, Venkatramana Wadgave, Ghanshyam Kakadiya and Nandan Marathe
International Journal of Spine Surgery June 2022, 16 (3) 505-511; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8249
Akash Shakya
1 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Dr BAM Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS, DNB, MRCSEd
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ayush Sharma
1 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Dr BAM Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS, DNB, D. Ortho, D. SICOT
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vijay Singh
1 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Dr BAM Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amisha Rathore
2 ESIC and PGIMSR, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vinayak Garje
2 ESIC and PGIMSR, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Venkatramana Wadgave
3 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Dr BAM Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, D. Ortho
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ghanshyam Kakadiya
4 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, TNMC and BYL Nair Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS, DNB
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nandan Marathe
5 Department of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India
MBBS, MS, MRCSEd
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Preoperative lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESI) are known to be a risk factor for intraoperative dural tears in traditional spine surgery. However, whether the same holds true after minimally invasive surgery is debatable. The authors decided to investigate the incidence of complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive lumbar discectomy after a preoperative LESI.

Methods A retrospective analysis was carried out on patients ages 21 to 65 years who underwent minimally invasive lumbar discectomy over 3 years between November 2017 and October 2020. These were classified into 2 groups based on the administration of an LESI within a year of surgery. Those receiving LESI were further subdivided on the basis of the proximity of the injection to the surgery. The complications encountered during and up to 6 months after the surgery were recorded. Various demographic variables were also noted.

Results A total of 315 patients were included in the study, of which 129 were in the LESI group and 186 were in the non-LESI group. The overall complication rate was 13.65%, with 17.83% in the LESI group and 10.75% in the non-LESI group (P = 0.07). Patients receiving an LESI were 2.49 times more likely to suffer from intraoperative dural tears compared to the other group (95% CI: 1.00–6.20, P = 0.049). This was more prevalent in those who were administered an LESI within 3 months of the surgery (OR: 3.24, 95% CI: 1.12–9.40, P = 0.03). However, the rates of other complications including infections were comparable.

Conclusions A history of LESI within 3 months of the surgery is a risk factor of intraoperative dural tears. However, other complications, including infections, are not affected by a preoperative LESI.

Clinical Relevance A history of an LESI within 3 months of a proposed minimally invasive discectomy should make the surgeon extra-cautious of the risk of a dural tear.

Level of Evidence 3.

  • LESI
  • minimally invasive
  • dural tears
  • infection
  • complication
  • lumbar
  • discectomy

Introduction

Lumbar epidural steroid injection (LESI) forms an important part of modern spine care. It helps in the conservative management of patients mainly with pathologies such as radiculopathy. These can be performed by a transforaminal, interlaminar, or caudal approach by injecting either a steroid alone or with a local anesthetic agent. Although the exact mechanism of action is not clear, it is probably because of the local anti-inflammatory and membrane stabilizing effects of the steroid and independent modulation of the peripheral nociceptor input.1 All of these methods have proved to be efficacious, but controversy exists regarding the relative efficacies of each approach.2,3

LESI may provide a short-term benefit in terms of pain relief and functional outcomes and may even make the need for a surgical intervention less likely.4,5 In spite of this, a proportion of patients still undergo surgery for residual or recurrent symptoms.5–7 Steroids can have a significant effect on the local biochemistry and thus can result in altered tissue biology, such as hypervascularity and epidural scarring. This can lead to numerous challenges that are not usually seen. The evidence in literature as to whether this can lead to an increased incidence of perioperative and postoperative complications, such as bleeding, dural tears (DTs), and infections, is sparse. Furthermore, we could not find a single study evaluating these parameters in patients undergoing management by minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS).

The authors felt the need to investigate whether the incidence of complications after MISS changes after an LESI is given preoperatively and whether there was a time-dependent pattern seen with regard to the complications. Thus, the study was designed to evaluate the association of a previous LESI on the incidence of various complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive, microtubular discectomy for a lumbar prolapsed intervertebral disc (PIVD).

Methodology

A retrospective study was undertaken at a tertiary care spine center after obtaining a waiver of approval from the local ethics committee. Written informed consent was obtained from all of the participants for participation in the trial. All patients who were operated on between November 2017 and October 2020 by minimally invasive microtubular discectomy for radiculopathy secondary to a PIVD were included in the study as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1). At our institute, all patients with symptomatic radiculopathy due to a PIVD are given a trial of transforaminal LESI as a protocol except in cases of cauda equina syndrome, recent onset neurologic deficit, severe pain, and patient denial. Those patients who improve are further managed conservatively, if required, with a follow-up LESI. Those with inadequate or incomplete relief are not offered a second LESI but are instead offered a further option of surgery. The process for patient selection is demonstrated in Figure 1. The preoperative data were recorded from the hospital records. These included the comorbidities, history of an LESI preoperatively, and other necessary demographic variables. Similarly, the perioperative and postoperative data including the complications were recorded from the case records of the department and the hospital records. The patients were divided into 2 groups, as follows: one who received an LESI at a maximum of 1 year preoperatively and the other who did not receive the intervention. The patients in the LESI group were further subdivided based on the interval between LESI and the surgery into 3 groups, as follows: ≤3 months, 3 to 6 months, and >6 months. All the surgeries were performed using the standard approach described in the literature.8

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure

Flowchart depicting patient selection for the study (LESI, lumbar epidural steroid injection).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for patient selection.

The complications encountered were subdivided into DT and non-dural tears (NDT). NDT included infections, new-onset neurological symptoms, and other medical issues needing specialist medical care, such as urinary tract infection, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, deep venous thrombosis, and so on. All the DTs were managed with fibrin glue and fat application over the site of durotomy, and none required an open repair. The DT closure was confirmed by a Valsalva maneuver given intraoperatively. Mobilization was delayed in all such cases for 48 hours. Patients were kept in Trendelenburg’s position and advised to lie prone as per the comfort level. A lumbar drain or acetazolamide was not used in any case. All asymptomatic cases were mobilized after 48 hours. All the surgeries were done using an 18-mm tubular system by a single team of surgeons. Clinical data were reviewed for at least 6 months postoperatively to recognize any delayed complications.

Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 23.0 version. Continuous variables were described as mean and variation of each observation from the mean value represented as mean ± SD (analyzed using independent t test). Categorical variables were described by taking percentages and analyzed using the χ 2 test or Fisher exact test when appropriate.

A binomial logistic analysis was performed to analyze the association between DT and LESI at the various time intervals between intervention and surgery, and OR was calculated with respect to the group not given the intervention. Furthermore, the NDT complications were analyzed for association with the intervention. A P value of <0.05 was taken as significant.

Results

A total of 315 patients were included in the final analysis as per the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 129 patients were given LESI in the 12 months before surgery and 186 patients were not given LESI. All the patients in the LESI group received the injection only once and then proceeded to surgery as there was no substantial relief postinjection. We could not find a single patient who required surgery either for incomplete relief or recurrence of the disease after having had 2 or more LESIs. The mean age of the patients was 53.2 ± 11.8 years. There were 192 males and 123 females, and the mean body mass index was 23.7 ± 2.9 kg/m2. The distribution of patients across the 2 groups was similar with respect to age, gender, and body mass index (Table 2). Similarly, the comorbidities were evenly distributed between the 2 groups with the most common comorbidity being diabetes mellitus, which was seen in 39 patients (12.4%). However, the patients in the LESI group had a significantly longer duration of symptoms before being operated upon (P = 0.002) (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Demographic variables of the patients in the 2 groups.

A total of 43 complications (13.65%) were witnessed in the study with 23 seen in the LESI group (17.83%) and 20 seen in the non-LESI group (10.75%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.07). A total of 21 DT were seen with an overall incidence of 6.67%. An incidence of 10.08% was seen in the LESI group in comparison to 4.30% in the non-LESI group, and this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.049) with an OR of 2.49 (Table 3). The subgroups of the LESI group were further analyzed. The incidence of DT in the ≤3 months, 3–6 months, and >6 months were 12.72%, 9.09%, and 6.67%, respectively. The OR calculation revealed that the patients receiving LESI within 3 months of the surgery were 3.24 times more likely to have a DT (P = 0.03). Although the ORs of the other 2 groups were >1, they were not significant and hence not considered to have a causal relationship with DT (Table 3). None of the patients were symptomatic for the DT postoperatively with no case of cerebrospinal fluid leakage witnessed.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3

Distribution of DT in the 2 groups and further subdivided on the basis of duration between LESI and surgery.

Twenty-two NDT complications were seen in the study, of which 10 were in the LESI groups and the rest in the non-LESI group over the 6-month postoperative period (Table 4). These were further subdivided into surgical and medical complications. The difference in the incidence of complications in the 2 groups was not significant (P = 0.83). Surgical complications included surgical site infections (SSI) and neurological complications arising after the surgery. One SSI was seen in the LESI group and 2 were seen in the non-LESI group. One SSI in the non-LESI group required surgical debridement, and the others were managed conservatively with dressing and antibiotics. Two incidences of new-onset neurological complications were seen in each group. These included a case of urinary incontinence in 1 patient in the LESI group, which was managed with a revision surgery with decompression and interbody fusion. Three patients developed new-onset radiculopathy that was managed with a revision decompression in 2 cases within 6 weeks of the first surgery, and the symptoms were relieved in both. One patient reported resolution of the symptoms at 6 weeks with conservative management.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4

Non-dural tear complications between the 2 groups.

Medical complications were seen in 15 patients, of which 7 were in the LESI group and 8 were in the non-LESI group (Table 4). These included 5 urinary tract infections, which were managed with antibiotics; 2 episodes of pneumonia, which were treated under specialist care in the postoperative intensive care unit; and 3 episodes of deep venous thrombosis, which were also managed conservatively. One patient in the LESI group was complicated with delirium, which also required intensive care for a week. One patient in the non-LESI group was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder 1 month postoperatively. Two patients in the LESI group and 3 patients in the non-LESI group required readmission within 1 month of discharge after the surgery.

Discussion

LESI remains one of the most commonly used management modalities in cases of a PIVD, and its use has gradually increased. Although the short-term results have generally been encouraging, the long-term results remain controversial.3,5 Functional outcomes have been shown to be similar or even slightly worse in the patients who have had an LESI before the surgery.7,9 Also, with the widespread use of MISS, the scenario has changed a lot. In general, MISS has shown to have comparable or even lesser complications compared to the open surgery, and whether this is reflected in the cohort of patients having already received the LESI remains a topic of discussion with not enough data available in the published literature to either support or refute the same.10–12 Furthermore, we could not find a single study in the published literature comparing the complications following MISS in patients receiving a prior LESI. Evaluation of complications after LESI in open surgery has been described to some extent but has centered mainly around SSIs.7,13,14

The demographic variables were comparable in the 2 groups as was the prevalence of comorbidities. The majority of the patients were less than 50 years old with 108 (83.7%) and 161 (86.5%) of the patients in the LESI and non-LESI group, respectively, being ≤50 years old thereby representing a younger population. The mean duration of symptoms was significantly higher in the LESI group (3.5 ± 1.5 months) as compared to the non-LESI group (2.9 ± 1.8 months). It was most likely due to the temporary or partial relief obtained after the LESI that delayed the surgery.

The present study reported an overall incidence of DT of 6.67% after MISS, which was comparable to that published in the literature.12,15–17 The incidence of DT after LESI (10.08%) was higher than that in the control group (4.30%; P < 0.05). Several studies have evaluated the risk factors for DT. Advanced age, obesity, diabetes mellitus, female gender, and revision surgeries have been stated as high-risk factors.16,17 However, a preoperative LESI as a risk factor has not been widely studied, especially after MISS. We observed that a preoperative LESI given within 3 months of the surgery leads to a 3.24 times higher risk of an intraoperative DT, which was statistically significant (P < 0.05). This significance was not observed beyond 3 months. A similar finding was also seen by Labaran et al, but they observed a significantly higher OR up to 6 months.14 However, Kolstov et al found that a preoperative LESI does not lead to a higher incidence of DT.13 None of these studies stated if they included patients operated by open or MISS approaches. Also, both the studies had a higher mean age as compared to our study. MISS has shown to have variable incidences of DT as compared to open surgeries and thus the results from the open surgery cannot be extrapolated to the minimally invasive approach.11,12,15 Hence, the present study is unique as all the patients were operated upon by the MISS approach exclusively.

The higher incidence of DT can be explained by the direct effects of steroids on the local tissue. The most common structure in the extracellular matrix of the meninges has been shown to be collagen with its various types like I, II, and IV. These are produced by the fibroblasts that are also commonly found there.18 Dura injected with corticosteroids showed a significantly decreased number of the intracytoplasmic mitochondria in the dural fibroblasts leading to an inhibitory effect on their function.19,20 This leads to a decreased production of collagen eventually causing a compromise in the material properties of the dural tissue that can make it susceptible to tear with even a minor injury. This can also explain the increased incidence of DT seen in the patients injected with a steroid within 3 months of the surgery as the effects of steroid are the highest then, with a gradual reduction as time passes with the return to a normal function of the fibroblasts.

We observed a comparable rate of postsurgical infection among the 2 groups. Kolstov et al and Hartveldt et al also witnessed similar infection rates after LESI injection as compared to the non-LESI group13,21 In contrast, Zusman et al observed a 7.4-fold greater risk of infection in patients receiving LESI before the surgery, which was attributed to the epidural scarring, increased vascularity, and introduction of infection at the time of injection.7 A higher infection rate was also noted elsewhere.22,23 Yang et al reported a 3.2 times higher rate of infection when LESI was given within 1 month of surgery.22 Another study demonstrated an increased risk of postsurgical infection between 1 and 6 months after epidural steroid administration.23 No infection in any group was seen by Ozturk et al.24 A comparable infection rate in our study could be explained by the minimally invasive nature of the surgeries. We also performed the procedure of LESI administration under strict aseptic precautions. Also, a much smaller sample size owing to a single center nature of the study as compared to some of these studies, which included large databases, can cause a sampling bias.

We noticed that the resurgery rates were comparable among the 2 groups, which was contrary to the findings of Kolstov et al, who observed a higher rate of resurgery within a month of the surgery in the LESI group.13 However, the incidence of a new-onset neurological symptom after the surgery was comparable to their study. Similarly, other complications including medical conditions were also comparable. Of note, we did not witness any case of mortality up to 6 months after surgery. We also witnessed psychiatric complications in the postoperative period. One case of delirium was seen in a 57-year-old woman in the LESI group, which was managed by the multidisciplinary team of neurologists, psychiatrists, and intensivists. It was attributed to a lower hematocrit and serum sodium level perioperatively and a gradual correction resulted in the recovery of the patient. The above-mentioned risk factors have already been described in the literature.25 A case of major depressive disorder was reported 1 month postoperatively in a 41-year-old man in the non-LESI group and was managed under the care of a psychiatrist with pharmacotherapy and behavior therapy. Spine surgery has been described as a risk factor for the development of new-onset depression, and it is essential to keep a watch for these complications postoperatively to obtain a better result.26

The study has a few limitations. First, the effect of these complications on the functional outcomes is not studied, and thus a direct correlation between the incidence of complications and outcomes cannot be obtained. Second, the smaller sample size could lead to the introduction of bias, especially concerning the rarer complications. A post hoc power analysis was performed, and the power was found to be 52.2%. Thus, a study with a larger sample size done in the future may shed further light on the topic. Third, delayed complications occurring after a duration of 6 months of the surgery are not reported. Finally, the study is limited by its retrospective nature.

Conclusion

In patients operated with MISS, there is a 3.2 times higher risk of an intraoperative DT if the surgery is performed within 3 months of the LESI. Furthermore, the incidences of postoperative infection and other complications remain comparable irrespective of the history of LESI.

Footnotes

  • Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

  • Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

  • Patient Consent for Publication All participants gave written consent for participation in the trial. Consent to Publish: All participants gave written consent for permission to publish.

  • Ethics Approval Ethical approval was waived by the local Ethics Committee of the hospital in view of the retrospective nature of the study and all the procedures being performed were part of the routine care.

  • Data Availability Statement The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

  • This manuscript is generously published free of charge by ISASS, the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery. Copyright © 2022 ISASS. To see more or order reprints or permissions, see http://ijssurgery.com.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Fenton D
    1. Sitzman BT
    . Epidural injections. In: Fenton D , ed. Image-Guided Spine Intervention. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2003:100–101.
  2. 2.↵
    1. Manchikanti L ,
    2. Knezevic NN ,
    3. Boswell MV ,
    4. Kaye AD ,
    5. Hirsch JA
    . Epidural injections for lumbar radiculopathy and spinal stenosis: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Phys. 2016;19(3):E365–E410. doi:10.36076/ppj/2016.19.E365
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    1. Lee JH ,
    2. Kim DH ,
    3. Kim DH , et al
    . Comparison of clinical efficacy of epidural injection with or without steroid in lumbosacral disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Phys. 2018;1(21;1):449–467. doi:10.36076/ppj.2018.5.449
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Riew KD ,
    2. Yin Y ,
    3. Gilula L , et al
    . The effect of nerve-root injections on the need for operative treatment of lumbar radicular pain. A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(11):1589–1593. doi:10.2106/00004623-200011000-00012
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Kamble PC ,
    2. Sharma A ,
    3. Singh V ,
    4. Natraj B ,
    5. Devani D ,
    6. Khapane V
    . Outcome of single level disc prolapse treated with transforaminal steroid versus epidural steroid versus caudal steroids. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(1):217–221. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3996-9
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    1. Koltsov JCB ,
    2. Smuck MW ,
    3. Zagel A , et al
    . Lumbar epidural steroid injections for herniation and stenosis: incidence and risk factors of subsequent surgery. Spine J. 2019;19(2):199–205. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2018.05.034
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. 7.↵
    1. Zusman N ,
    2. Munch JL ,
    3. Ching A ,
    4. Hart R ,
    5. Yoo J
    . Preoperative epidural spinal injections increase the risk of surgical wound complications but do not affect overall complication risk or patient-perceived outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23(5):652–655. doi:10.3171/2015.2.SPINE14827
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Yoon SM ,
    2. Ahn SS ,
    3. Kim KH ,
    4. Kim YD ,
    5. Cho JH ,
    6. Kim DH
    . Comparative study of the outcomes of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and microscopic lumbar discectomy using the tubular retractor system based on the VAS, ODI, and SF-36. Korean J Spine. 2012;9(3):215–222. doi:10.14245/kjs.2012.9.3.215
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Radcliff K ,
    2. Kepler C ,
    3. Hilibrand A , et al
    . Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(4):279–291. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827ec51f
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. 10.↵
    1. Harrington JF ,
    2. French P
    . Open versus minimally invasive lumbar microdiscectomy: comparison of operative times, length of hospital stay, narcotic use and complications. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2008;51(1):30–35. doi:10.1055/s-2007-1004543
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Fourney DR ,
    2. Dettori JR ,
    3. Norvell DC ,
    4. Dekutoski MB
    . Does minimal access tubular assisted spine surgery increase or decrease complications in spinal decompression or fusion? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(9 Suppl):S57-65. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d82bb8
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.↵
    1. Rasouli MR ,
    2. Rahimi-Movaghar V ,
    3. Shokraneh F ,
    4. Moradi-Lakeh M ,
    5. Chou R
    . Minimally invasive discectomy versus microdiscectomy/open discectomy for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(9):CD010328. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010328.pub2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Koltsov JCB ,
    2. Smuck MW ,
    3. Alamin TF ,
    4. Wood KB ,
    5. Cheng I ,
    6. Hu SS
    . Preoperative epidural steroid injections are not associated with increased rates of infection and dural tear in lumbar spine surgery. Eur Spine J. 2021;30(4):870–877. doi:10.1007/s00586-020-06566-6
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    1. Labaran LA ,
    2. Puvanesarajah V ,
    3. Rao SS , et al
    . Recent preoperative lumbar epidural steroid injection is an independent risk factor for incidental durotomy during lumbar discectomy. Global Spine J. 2019;9(8):807–812. doi:10.1177/2192568219833656
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. 15.↵
    1. Wong AP ,
    2. Shih P ,
    3. Smith TR , et al
    . Comparison of symptomatic cerebral spinal fluid leak between patients undergoing minimally invasive versus open lumbar foraminotomy, discectomy, or laminectomy. World Neurosurg. 2014;81(3–4):634–640. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2013.11.012
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. 16.↵
    1. Takahashi Y ,
    2. Sato T ,
    3. Hyodo H , et al
    . Incidental durotomy during lumbar spine surgery: risk factors and anatomic locations: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18(2):165–169. doi:10.3171/2012.10.SPINE12271
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Baker GA ,
    2. Cizik AM ,
    3. Bransford RJ , et al
    . Risk factors for unintended durotomy during spine surgery: a multivariate analysis. Spine J. 2012;12(2):121–126. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2012.01.012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Decimo I ,
    2. Fumagalli G ,
    3. Berton V ,
    4. Krampera M ,
    5. Bifari F
    . Meninges: from protective membrane to stem cell niche. Am J Stem Cells. 2012;1(2):92–105.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Slucky AV ,
    2. Sacks MS ,
    3. Pallares VS ,
    4. Malinin TI ,
    5. Eismont FJ
    . Effects of epidural steroids on lumbar dura material properties. J Spinal Disord. 1999;12(4):331–340. doi:10.1097/00002517-199908000-00010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Karnani DN ,
    2. Dirain CO ,
    3. Antonelli PJ
    . The effects of steroids on survival of mouse and human tympanic membrane fibroblasts. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;163(2):382–388. doi:10.1177/0194599820912739
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hartveldt S ,
    2. Janssen SJ ,
    3. Wood KB , et al
    . Is there an association of epidural corticosteroid injection with postoperative surgical site infection after surgery for lumbar degenerative spine disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(19):1542–1547. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000001548
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. 22.↵
    1. Yang S ,
    2. Werner BC ,
    3. Cancienne JM , et al
    . Preoperative epidural injections are associated with increased risk of infection after single-level lumbar decompression. Spine J. 2016;16(2):191–196. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.439
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  23. 23.↵
    1. Donnally CJ ,
    2. Rush AJ ,
    3. Rivera S , et al
    . An epidural steroid injection in the 6 months preceding a lumbar decompression without fusion predisposes patients to post-operative infections. J Spine Surg. 2018;4(3):529–533. doi:10.21037/jss.2018.09.05
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. Ozturk S ,
    2. Akgun B ,
    3. Erol FS ,
    4. Onal SA ,
    5. Kaplan M
    . Intraoperative results and postoperative clinical outcomes of lumbar microdiscectomy in patients who previously received a transforaminal anterior epidural steroid injection for lumbar radiculopathy. Turk Neurosurg. 2018;28(2):263–269. doi:10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.19209-16.1
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. 25.↵
    1. Morino T ,
    2. Hino M ,
    3. Yamaoka S , et al
    . Risk factors for delirium after spine surgery: an age-matched analysis. Asian Spine J. 2018;12(4):703–709. doi:10.31616/asj.2018.12.4.703
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    1. Wilson BR ,
    2. Tringale KR ,
    3. Hirshman BR , et al
    . Depression after spinal surgery: a comparative analysis of the california outcomes database. Mayo Clin Proc. 2017;92(1):88–97. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.06.030
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 16, Issue 3
1 Jun 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Preoperative Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection Increases the Risk of a Dural Tear During Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Preoperative Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection Increases the Risk of a Dural Tear During Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy
Akash Shakya, Ayush Sharma, Vijay Singh, Amisha Rathore, Vinayak Garje, Venkatramana Wadgave, Ghanshyam Kakadiya, Nandan Marathe
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2022, 16 (3) 505-511; DOI: 10.14444/8249

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Preoperative Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection Increases the Risk of a Dural Tear During Minimally Invasive Lumbar Discectomy
Akash Shakya, Ayush Sharma, Vijay Singh, Amisha Rathore, Vinayak Garje, Venkatramana Wadgave, Ghanshyam Kakadiya, Nandan Marathe
International Journal of Spine Surgery Jun 2022, 16 (3) 505-511; DOI: 10.14444/8249
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methodology
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Comparative Review of Lateral and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique, Outcomes, and Complications
  • A Spine Surgeon’s Learning Curve With the Minimally Invasive L5 to S1 Lateral ALIF Surgical Approach: Perioperative Outcomes and Technical Considerations
  • Fully Navigated Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Detailed Technical Report and Description of 15 Cases
Show more Minimally Invasive Surgery

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • LESI
  • minimally invasive
  • dural tears
  • infection
  • complication
  • lumbar
  • discectomy

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire