Influence of distal insertion technique, valve selection, and patient demographics on shunt survival in ventriculoperitoneal shunt insertion: A retrospective analysis of an Australian case series

Abstract

Background

Ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt insertion is a means of diverting cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for management of hydrocephalus. Revision rates, operating time, and length of stay (LOS) following laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter have been mixed. There are limited data on the role of adhesiolysis during VP shunt insertion. Valve characteristics have also been shown to influence patient outcomes. There is a paucity of Australian data reporting on the effect of these variables on shunt outcomes. We aimed to study patient demographics, indications, and surgical and instrument variables in the Australian context.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, multi-surgeon, single-centre analysis of VP shunts inserted in adults via an open or laparoscopic technique. Data on patient demographics and surgery characteristics were collected from the hospital medical records and the Australasian Shunt Registry. The primary outcome was shunt revision rate and secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, operating time and LOS, and shunt survivability.

Results

Fifty-six participants were eligible for analysis. The overall revision rate was 14.3 %, which was lower than the national average. The distal catheter revision rate was 0 %. Laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter was shown to significantly reduce operating time (70.4 min in the open group and 50.7 min in the laparoscopic group, p < 0.001). This was demonstrated across different aetiologies, and when controlling for age and valve-type (p < 0.05). The revision rate of non-programmable was higher than programmable valves (42.9 % versus 2.9 %, respectively). There were no differences between previous abdominal surgery, LOS, complication, or revision rate between open and laparoscopic insertion. VP shunt survivability was greater in the laparoscopic group (90-day shunt survival of 96.7 % and 92 % in the laparoscopy and open groups, respectively; p > 0.05). We did not find any significant difference in operating time or length of stay for age, sex, or previous abdominal surgery, even when accounting for surgical technique. Indication and shunt survivability varied widely between age groups. The use of laparoscopic insertion increased over time, though surgeons did not crossover techniques.

Conclusions

The overall distal revision rate of VP shunts is low. Laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter reduces operating time and may improve shunt survivability. Larger studies are needed to confirm differences in shunt survivability in open versus laparoscopic distal catheter insertion, between age groups, clinical indications, and valve type on patient outcomes.

Keywords

ventriculoperitoneal shunt, hydrocephalus, laparoscopic, laparotomy, non-programmable valve, shunt revision

Link to Publisher Version (URL)

10.1016/j.jocn.2024.05.021

This document is currently not available here.

Find in your library

Share

COinS