The Effect of lumbar drains on spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid leak repair

Article Figures & Data

Table 1

Patient’s demographics and data.

Factors	All patients N=13
*Age*
age, years mean±SD	43.6±12.5
*Gender, n (%)*
Males	1 (7.7)
Females	12 (92.3)
BMI (kg/m²), mean±SD	34.9±6.27
*Concurrent symptoms, n(%)*
Headaches	3 (23.1)
Blurred vision	2 (15.4)
Convulsions	1 (7.7)
meningitis before presentation	5 (38.5)
*Duration of CSF leak at presentation*
(months), mean±SD	9.5±1.3
*location of defect, n (%)*
cribriform plate	2 (15.4)
ethmoid	9 (69.2)
sphenoid	1 (7.7)
combined cribriform and sphenoid	1 (7.7)
Meningioencephalocele, n (%)	8 (61.5)
*Sella status, n (%)*
Empty Sella	2 (15.4)
Partially Empty	3 (23.1)
*Adjuvant therapies, n (%)*
Lumbar drain	13 (100)
Acetazolamide	6 (46.2)
Furosemide	1 (7.7)
Duration of lumbar drain, mean±SD	6.38±1.3
Hospital stay in days, mean±SD	12.1±6.7
Recurrence, n (%)	4 (30.8)

SD - standard deviation, BMI - body mass index, CSF - Spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid

Table 2

Patient factors and group comparison.

Factors	Recurrence n=4	No recurrence n=9	P-value

	n (%)
age (mean)	34.2	47.7	0.037
females (%)	4 (100)	8 (88.9)	0.692
BMI (mean)	33.4	35.6	0.699
High opening pressure	1 (25)	3 (33.3)	0.776
Acetazolamide	2 (50)	4 (44.4)	0.35
meningiocele	1 (25)	7 (77.8)	0.119
post op complications	1 (25)	1 (11.1)	0.538
LP duration	7	6.1	0.627
defect area	2.73	4.92	0.06