Patient-specific automated cerebrospinal fluid pressure control to augment spinal wound closure: a case series using the LiquoGuard®

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks are common, and their management is heterogeneous. For high-flow leaks, numerous studies advocate for primary dural repair and CSF diversion. The LiquoGuard7® allows automated and precise pressure and volume control, and calculation of patient-specific CSF production rate (prCSF), which is hypothesized to be increased in the context of durotomies and CSF leaks.

METHODS

This single-centre illustrative case series included patients undergoing complex spinal surgery where: 1) a high flow intra-operative and/or post-operative CSF leak was expected and 2) lumbar CSF drainage was performed using a LiquoGuard7®. CSF diversion was tailored to prCSF for each patient, combined with layered spinal wound closure.

RESULTS

Three patients were included, with a variety of pathologies: T7/T8 disc prolapse, T8-T9 meningioma, and T4-T5 metastatic spinal cord compression. The first two patients underwent CSF diversion to prevent post-op CSF leak, whilst the third required this in response to post-op CSF leak. CSF hyperproduction was evident in all cases (mean >/=140ml/hr). With patient-specific CSF diversion regimes, no cases required further intervention for CSF fistulae repair (including for pleural CSF effusion), wound breakdown or infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-specific cerebrospinal fluid drainage may be a useful tool in the management of high-flow intra-operative and post-operative CSF leaks during complex spinal surgery. These systems may reduce post-operative CSF leakage from the wound or into adjacent body cavities. Further larger studies are needed to evaluate the comparative benefits and cost-effectiveness of this approach.

Cerebrospinal fluid production rate in various pathological conditions: a preliminary study

INTRODUCTION

The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) production rate in humans is not clearly defined but is estimated to be 18-24 ml/h (Trevisi et al Croat Med J 55(4):377-387 (24); Casey and Vries Childs Nerv Syst 5(5):332-334 (8)). A frequent clinical observation is that patients often drain higher volumes of CSF than can be explained by the assumed 'normal' CSF production rate (PRcsf). In the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery PRcsf was recorded in a variety of common neurosurgical pathologies using LiquoGuard7, an automated peristaltic pump that accurately controls CSF drainage and maintains a pre-set CSF pressure.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was performed from September 2021 onwards, on all patients in the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery who required CSF drainage as part of their ongoing treatment. The external drain was connected to a LiquoGuard7 pump (Möller Medical GmbH, Fulda, Germany), and the internal software of LiquoGuard7 was used to measure PRcsf. Statistical analysis used SPSS (version 25.0, IBM) by paired t test, comparing measured rates to hypothetical 'normal' CSF production rates calculated and published by Ekstedt (16-34ml/h) (Ekstedt J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 41(4):345-353 (14)), assuming a similar distribution.

RESULTS

PRcsf was calculated in 164 patients. Suspected normal pressure hydrocephalus (n=41): PRcsf of 79ml/h±20SD (p<0.0001). Post-surgical CSF leak (n=26): PRcsf of 90ml/h±20SD (p<0.0001). Subarachnoid haemorrhage (n=34): PRcsf of 143ml/h±9SD (p<0.0001). Intracerebral haemorrhage (n=22): PRcsf of 137ml/h±20SD (p<0.0001). Spinal lesions (n=7): PRcsf of 130ml/h±20SD (p<0.0032). Pituitary adenomas (n=10): PRcsf of 29 ml/h±9SD (p<0.049). Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (n=15): PRcsf of 86ml/h±10SD (p<0.0001). Decompensated long-standing overt ventriculomegaly (n=4): PRcsf of 65ml/h±10SD (p<0.0001). Cerebral infection (n=5): PRcsf of 90ml/h±20SD (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Net CSF production rate may be higher than expected in many conditions, as measured with new device LiquoGuard7 through the study of net flow rate, which may have implications for clinical decisions on CSF diversion. The conventional understanding of CSF production and circulation does not explain the findings of this study. More extensive studies are needed to validate this technique.