The effect of using synthetic vs. biological dural substitutes during prenatal and postnatal repair of spina bifida on spinal cord tethering-a review of literature.

Abstract

Spina bifida is a congenital neural tube closure defect, with myelomeningocele being the most clinically significant open neural tube defect occurring in one in 1000 births worldwide as reported by Phillips LA et al. (Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care 47(7):173-177, 2017) and Zerah M and Kulkarni AV (Handb Clin Neurol 112:975-991, 2013). With advances in fetal surgery, this condition can be corrected in utero. Despite such precision surgery, many complications may still arise, with consequent spinal cord tethering being a major one. When the roots of the spinal cord adhere to the spinal canal instead of floating freely within the dural sleeve within the canal, it is termed as "tethering" as discussed by Martínez-Lage JF et al. (Neurocirugia (Astur) 18(4):312-319, 2007). Tethering has a variety of complications, which are best avoided by analyzing the outcomes of the different dural substitutes and improving surgical techniques. This literature review evaluates the use of different dural substitutes in fetal and postnatal surgery, with their effects on spinal cord tethering. Finding a significant difference in spinal cord adherence outcomes between these two groups can help one introspect on the impact of ideal surgical techniques to be implemented, thus reducing subsequent tethering and other future surgical interventions.