Literature DB >> 31586189

A Comparison of Ventriculoperitoneal and Ventriculoatrial Shunts in a Population of 544 Consecutive Pediatric Patients.

George N Rymarczuk1,2, Robert F Keating1, Daniel J Coughlin2, Daniel Felbaum3, John S Myseros1, Chima Oluigbo1, Bhupender Yadav4, Karun Sharma4, Suresh N Magge1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although ventriculoperitoneal shunts (VPS) remain the first-line option in most instances of pediatric hydrocephalus, the long-term efficacy of ventriculoatrial shunts (VAS) remains unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the long-term outcomes and adverse occurrences associated with both VPS and VAS at our institution.
METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed all cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) shunting procedures performed over a 13-yr period at a single institution. A total of 544 pediatric shunt patients were followed for at least 90 d (VPS: 5.9 yr; VAS: 5.3 yr).
RESULTS: A total of 54% of VPS and 60% of VAS required at least 1 revision. VPS demonstrated superior survival overall; however, if electively scheduled VAS lengthening procedures are not considered true "failures," no statistical difference is noted in overall survival (P = .08). VPS demonstrated significantly greater survival in patients less than 7 yr of age (P = .001), but showed no difference in older children (P = .4). VAS had a significantly lower rate of infection (P < .05) and proximal failure (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: VAS can be a useful alternative to VPS when the abdomen is unsuitable, particularly in older children. Although VPS demonstrates superior overall survival, it should be understood that elective VAS lengthening procedures are often necessary, especially in younger patients. If elective lengthening procedures are not considered true failures, then the devices show similar survival.
Copyright © 2019 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cerebrospinal fluid; Hydrocephalus; Ventriculoatrial shunt; Ventriculoperitoneal shunt

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31586189     DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyz387

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  6 in total

1.  Should not we be using aspirin in patients with a ventriculoatrial shunt? Borrowing a leaf from other specialities: a case for surrogate evidence.

Authors:  Suhas Udayakumaran; Shine Kumar
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 1.475

2.  Radiological correlation of mechanism of intravascular migration of the ventriculoperitoneal shunt and technical considerations for endovascular retrieval.

Authors:  Rakesh K Varma; Karan Singh; Theresa Caridi; Aliaksei Salei; Husameddin El Khudari
Journal:  J Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2022-01-01

3.  The survival of reimplanted shunts following externalization: a single-institution cohort study.

Authors:  Patrick D Kelly; Aaron M Yengo-Kahn; Robert P Naftel
Journal:  J Neurosurg Pediatr       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 2.375

4.  Case Series of Ventriculoatrial Shunt placement in Hybrid Room: Reassessment of Ventriculoatrial Shunt.

Authors:  Young Ha Kim; Sang Weon Lee; Dong Hyun Kim; Chi Hyung Lee; Chang Hyeun Kim; Soon Ki Sung; Dong Wuk Son; Geun Sung Song
Journal:  Korean J Neurotrauma       Date:  2020-10-28

5.  The Sheep as a Comprehensive Animal Model to Investigate Interdependent Physiological Pressure Propagation and Multiparameter Influence on Cerebrospinal Fluid Dynamics.

Authors:  Nina Eva Trimmel; Anthony Podgoršak; Markus Florian Oertel; Simone Jucker; Margarete Arras; Marianne Schmid Daners; Miriam Weisskopf
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 4.677

6.  Endovascular retrieval of a broken distal ventriculoatrial shunt catheter within the heart: illustrative case.

Authors:  Jordan Xu; Gira Morchi; Suresh N Magge
Journal:  J Neurosurg Case Lessons       Date:  2021-11-22
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.