Search

BACKGROUND: Liqoseal (Polyganics, B.V.) is a dural sealant patch for preventing postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage. It has been extensively tested preclinically and CE (Conformité Européenne) approved for human use after a first cranial in-human study. However, the safety of Liqoseal for spinal application is still unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of spinal Liqoseal application compared with cranial application using histology and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics.METHODS: Eight female Dutch Landrace pigs underwent laminectomy, durotomy with standard suturing and Liqoseal application. Three control animals underwent the same procedure without sealant application. The histological characteristics and imaging characteristics of animals with similar survival times were compared to data from a previous cranial porcine model.RESULTS: Similar foreign body reactions were observed in spinal and cranial dura. The foreign body reaction consisted of neutrophils and reactive fibroblasts in the first 3 days, changing to a chronic granulomatous inflammatory reaction with an increasing number of macrophages and lymphocytes and the formation of a fibroblast layer on the dura by day 7. Mean Liqoseal plus dura thickness reached a maximum of 1.2 mm (range 0.7-2.0 mm) at day 7.CONCLUSION: The spinal dural histological reaction to Liqoseal during the first 7 days was similar to the cranial dural reaction. Liqoseal did not swell significantly in both application areas over time. Given the current lack of a safe and effective dural sealant for spinal application, we propose that an in-human safety study of Liqoseal is the logical next step.

BACKGROUND Liqoseal (Polyganics, B.V.) is a dural sealant patch for preventing postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage. It has been extensively tested preclinically and CE (Conformité Européenne) approved for human use after a first cranial in-human study. However, the safety of Liqoseal for spinal application is still unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of spinal Liqoseal application compared with cranial application using histology and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics. METHODS Eight female Dutch Landrace pigs underwent laminectomy, durotomy with standard suturing and Liqoseal application. Three control animals underwent the same procedure without sealant application. The histological characteristics and imaging characteristics of animals with similar survival times were compared to data from a previous cranial porcine model. RESULTS Similar foreign body reactions were observed in spinal and cranial dura. The foreign body reaction consisted of neutrophils and reactive fibroblasts in the first 3 days, changing to a chronic granulomatous inflammatory reaction with an increasing number of macrophages and lymphocytes and the formation of a fibroblast layer on the dura by day 7. Mean Liqoseal plus dura thickness reached a maximum of 1.2 mm (range 0.7-2.0 mm) at day 7. CONCLUSION The spinal dural histological reaction to Liqoseal during the first 7 days was similar to the cranial dural reaction. Liqoseal did not swell significantly in both application areas over time. Given the current lack of a safe and effective dural sealant for spinal application, we propose that an in-human safety study of Liqoseal is the logical next step.

Background Liqoseal consists of a watertight layer of poly(ester)ether urethane and an adhesive layer containing polyethylene glycol-N-hydroxysuccinimide (PEG-NHS). It is designed to prevent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage after intradural surgery. This study assessed the safety and biodegradability of Liqoseal in a porcine craniotomy model. Methods In 32 pigs a craniotomy plus durotomy was performed. In 15 pigs Liqoseal was implanted, in 11 control pigs no sealant was implanted and in 6 control pigs a control dural sealant (Duraseal or Tachosil) was implanted. The safety of Liqoseal was evaluated by clinical, MRI and histological assessment. The degradation of Liqoseal was histologically estimated. Results Liqoseal, 2 mm thick before application, did not swell and significantly was at maximum mean thickness of 2.14 (±0.37) mm at one month. The foreign body reaction induced by Liqoseal, Duraseal and Tachosil were comparable. Liqoseal showed no adherence to the arachnoid layer and was completely resorbed between 6 and 12 months postoperatively. In one animal with Liqoseal, an epidural fluid collection containing CSF could not be excluded. Conclusion Liqoseal seems to be safe for intracranial use and is biodegradable. The safety and performance in humans needs to be further assessed in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage occurs in 4% to 32% of cranial surgeries and is associated with significant patient burden and expense. The use of sealant as an adjunct to primary dural closure is assumed to help prevent CSF leakage.OBJECTIVE: To examine the utility of different sealants for dural closure using an in Vitro model.METHODS: We evaluated 9 commonly used dural sealants, including Tachosil (Takeda Inc, Osaka, Japan), Adherus (Hyperbranch Inc, Durham, North Carolina), Duraform (Codman, Raynham, Massachusetts), Tissudura (Baxter, Deerfield, Illinois), Hemopatch (Baxter), TissuePatchDural (Tissuemed, Leeds, United Kingdom), Tisseel (Baxter), Duragen Secure (Integra, Plainsboro, New Jersey), and Duraseal, (Integra). Sealants were tested in 2 novel in Vitro setups using fresh porcine dura: the first tested the acute burst pressure of a sealed 3-mm gap, while the second examined resistance to a pressure wave mimicking intracranial pressure for 72 h.RESULTS: Adherus showed the highest mean burst pressure (87 ± 47 mmHg) followed by Tachosil (71 ± 16 mmHg) and Duraseal (51 ± 42 mmHg); these were the only 3 sealants showing burst pressures above normal physiological intracranial pressure. In the 72-h setup, only Adherus and Duraseal maintained appropriate sealing for the duration of the experiment. Tachosil released from the dura after 1.4 h (95% confidence interval, -1.8-4.7).CONCLUSION: Given the high cost of sealants and the results of this study, we advocate a critical attitude toward sealant application as an adjunct to classic dural closure.