IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p13847-d952257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management of Traumatic and Non-Traumatic Cerebrospinal Fluid Rhinorrhea—Experience from Three Southeast Asian Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Farah Dayana Zahedi

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia)

  • Somasundaram Subramaniam

    (Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore
    Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore 609606, Singapore)

  • Pornthep Kasemsiri

    (Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40000, Thailand)

  • Chenthilnathan Periasamy

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Penang General Hospital, George Town 10990, Malaysia)

  • Baharudin Abdullah

    (Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia)

Abstract

Background: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) rhinorrhea requires proper management to avoid disastrous consequences. The objectives of this study were to ascertain the patient characteristics, etiologies, sites of defect, skull base configurations, methods of investigation, and management outcomes of CSF rhinorrhea. Methods: A retrospective study was performed over 4 years involving three surgeons from Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. Hospital records were reviewed to determine the patients’ characteristics, the causes and sites of leaks, methods of investigation, skull base configurations, choices of treatment, and outcomes. Results: A total of 15 cases (7 traumatic and 8 non-traumatic) were included. Imaging was performed in all cases. The most common site of leakage was the cribriform plate (9/15 cases). The mean ± SD of the Keros heights were 4.43 ± 1.66 (right) and 4.21 ± 1.76 mm (left). Type II Keros was the most common (60%). The mean ± SD angles of the cribriform plate slope were 51.91 ± 13.43 degrees (right) and 63.54 ± 12.64 degrees (left). A class II Gera configuration was the most common (80%). All except two patients were treated with endonasal endoscopic surgical repair, with a success rate of 92.3%. A multilayered repair technique was used in all patients except one. The mean ± SD postoperative hospital stay was 9.07 ± 6.17 days. Conclusions: Non-traumatic CSF rhinorrhea outnumbered traumatic CSF rhinorrhea, with the most common site of leak at the cribriform plate. Imaging plays an important role in investigation, and Gera classification appears to be better than Keros classification for evaluating risk. Both conservative and surgical repairs are practiced with successful outcomes. Endonasal endoscopic CSF leak repair is the mainstay treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • Farah Dayana Zahedi & Somasundaram Subramaniam & Pornthep Kasemsiri & Chenthilnathan Periasamy & Baharudin Abdullah, 2022. "Management of Traumatic and Non-Traumatic Cerebrospinal Fluid Rhinorrhea—Experience from Three Southeast Asian Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-14, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13847-:d:952257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13847/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/13847/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:13847-:d:952257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.