Literature DB >> 20502904

A retrospective analysis of revision endoscopic third ventriculostomy.

Surash Surash1, Paul Chumas, Deepti Bhargava, Darach Crimmins, John Straiton, Atul Tyagi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) has gained favour as an effective treatment for obstructive hydrocephalus. However, the timing of ETV failure and the long-term efficacy of revision ETV remain poorly documented.
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing revision ETV between 1999 and 2007. Only those patients in whom there was evidence of a good sustained clinical improvement after the initial ETV were considered candidates for ETV revision. All other patients underwent insertion of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt at the time of ETV failure. Failures that were selected for repeat ETV were subdivided into; "early" if the revision occurred within the first 3 months of the primary procedure and "late" if occurring after this.
RESULTS: Ten patients underwent revision ETV (6% of all ETVs performed). Age ranged from 2 months to 32 years (mean 13.6 years). Three "early" revision ETV were performed at a mean of 1.3 months, and there were seven "late" revisions performed at a mean of 27 months. The stoma was closed in seven patients and narrowed in one patient, and a second membrane was found under the original patent stoma in a further two patients. In two patients, a third ETV procedure was performed (both at 1 month after second ETV), and the stoma was closed in both these patients. No patients have required a shunt.
CONCLUSION: At last follow-up (mean 38 months), all patients remain well. Revision ETV appears a safe and effective means of managing hydrocephalus-providing there is clinical evidence that the primary procedure was initially effective. It is important to emphasise that patients with an initially successful ETV are by no means "cured".

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20502904     DOI: 10.1007/s00381-010-1176-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst        ISSN: 0256-7040            Impact factor:   1.475


  15 in total

1.  Imaging correlates of successful endoscopic third ventriculostomy.

Authors:  A V Kulkarni; J M Drake; D C Armstrong; P B Dirks
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.115

2.  Intracranial hypertrophic calcification complicating neuroendoscopy. Report of three cases.

Authors:  Simon Thomson; Atul K Tyagi; Paul D Chumas
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.115

3.  Percutaneous third ventriculostomy: experience and technique.

Authors:  M P Sayers; E J Kosnik
Journal:  Childs Brain       Date:  1976

4.  Failed endoscopic third ventriculostomy in children: management options.

Authors:  Aaron Mohanty; M K Vasudev; S Sampath; S Radhesh; V R Sastry Kolluri
Journal:  Pediatr Neurosurg       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 1.162

5.  Obstructive hydrocephalus following herpes simplex virus type 1 encephalitis treated by repeated third ventriculostomy.

Authors:  A Tyagi; P Chumas; C Ferrie
Journal:  Pediatr Neurosurg       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.162

6.  Clinical features of third ventriculostomy failures classified by fenestration patency.

Authors:  Toru Fukuhara; Mark G Luciano; Robert J Kowalski
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  2002-08

7.  Mechanisms of failure after endoscopic third ventriculostomy in young infants.

Authors:  Wolfgang Wagner; Dorothee Koch
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 5.115

8.  Repeat endoscopic third ventriculostomy: is it worth trying?

Authors:  V Siomin; H Weiner; J Wisoff; G Cinalli; A Pierre-Kahn; C Saint-Rose; R Abbott; H Elran; L Beni-Adani; G Ouaknine; S Constantini
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.475

9.  Failure of third ventriculostomy in the treatment of aqueductal stenosis in children.

Authors:  G Cinalli; C Sainte-Rose; P Chumas; M Zerah; F Brunelle; G Lot; A Pierre-Kahn; D Renier
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.115

10.  Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in infants of less than 1 year of age: which factors influence the outcome?

Authors:  Dorothee Koch; Wolfgang Wagner
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2004-04-28       Impact factor: 1.475

View more
  6 in total

1.  Endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy in hydrocephalic children under 2 years of age: appropriate or not? A single-center retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  L Fani; T H R de Jong; R Dammers; M L C van Veelen
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 1.475

2.  Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in patients with shunt malfunction.

Authors:  Seung Hoon Lee; Doo Sik Kong; Ho Joon Seol; Hyung Jin Shin
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2011-04-30

3.  Outcome of treatment after failed endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) in infants with aqueductal stenosis: results from the International Infant Hydrocephalus Study (IIHS).

Authors:  Abhaya V Kulkarni; Spyros Sgouros; Shlomi Constantini
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 1.475

4.  Endoscopic third ventriculostomy revision after failure of initial endoscopic third ventriculostomy and choroid plexus cauterization.

Authors:  Anastasia Arynchyna-Smith; Curtis J Rozzelle; Hailey Jensen; Ron W Reeder; Abhaya V Kulkarni; Ian F Pollack; John C Wellons; Robert P Naftel; Eric M Jackson; William E Whitehead; Jonathan A Pindrik; David D Limbrick; Patrick J McDonald; Mandeep S Tamber; Brent R O'Neill; Jason S Hauptman; Mark D Krieger; Jason Chu; Tamara D Simon; Jay Riva-Cambrin; John R W Kestle; Brandon G Rocque
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 2.713

5.  An external validation of the ETVSS for both short-term and long-term predictive adequacy in 104 pediatric patients.

Authors:  G E Breimer; D A Sival; M G J Brusse-Keizer; E W Hoving
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2013-05-05       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 6.  Limitations of Neuroendoscopic Treatment for Pediatric Hydrocephalus and Considerations from Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Kenichi Nishiyama; Junichi Yoshimura; Yukihiko Fujii
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 1.742

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.