Cargando…

Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Ventricular access devices (VAD) and ventriculosubgaleal shunts (VSGS) are currently both used as temporising devices to affect CSF drainage in neonatal posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus (PHH), without clear evidence of superiority of either procedure. In this systematic review and meta-a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fountain, Daniel M., Chari, Aswin, Allen, Dominic, James, Greg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4749661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26560885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2951-8
_version_ 1782415296658669568
author Fountain, Daniel M.
Chari, Aswin
Allen, Dominic
James, Greg
author_facet Fountain, Daniel M.
Chari, Aswin
Allen, Dominic
James, Greg
author_sort Fountain, Daniel M.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Ventricular access devices (VAD) and ventriculosubgaleal shunts (VSGS) are currently both used as temporising devices to affect CSF drainage in neonatal posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus (PHH), without clear evidence of superiority of either procedure. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the VSGS and VAD regarding complication rates, ventriculoperitoneal shunt conversion and infection rates, and mortality and long-term disability. METHODS: The review was registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42015019750) and was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The literature search of five databases identified 338 publications, of which 5 met the inclusion criteria. All were retrospective cohort studies (evidence class 3b and 4). A significantly lower proportion of patients with a VSGS required CSF tapping compared to patients with a VAD (log OR −4.43, 95 % CI −6.14 to −2.72). No other significant differences between the VAD and VSGS were identified in their rates of infection (log OR 0.03, 95 % CI −0.77 to 0.84), obstruction (log OR 1.25, 95 % CI −0.21 to 2.71), ventriculoperitoneal shunt dependence (log OR −0.06, 95 % CI −0.93 to 0.82), subsequent shunt infection (log OR 0.23, 95 % CI −0.61 to 1.06), mortality (log OR 0.37, 95 % CI −0.95 to 1.70) or long-term disability (p = 0.9). In all studies, there was a lack of standardised criteria, variations between surgeons in heterogeneous cohorts of limited sample size and a lack of neurodevelopmental follow-up. This affirms the importance of an ongoing multicentre, prospective pilot study comparing these two temporising procedures to enable a more robust comparison. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00381-015-2951-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4749661
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47496612016-02-19 Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis Fountain, Daniel M. Chari, Aswin Allen, Dominic James, Greg Childs Nerv Syst Review Paper INTRODUCTION: Ventricular access devices (VAD) and ventriculosubgaleal shunts (VSGS) are currently both used as temporising devices to affect CSF drainage in neonatal posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus (PHH), without clear evidence of superiority of either procedure. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the VSGS and VAD regarding complication rates, ventriculoperitoneal shunt conversion and infection rates, and mortality and long-term disability. METHODS: The review was registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42015019750) and was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The literature search of five databases identified 338 publications, of which 5 met the inclusion criteria. All were retrospective cohort studies (evidence class 3b and 4). A significantly lower proportion of patients with a VSGS required CSF tapping compared to patients with a VAD (log OR −4.43, 95 % CI −6.14 to −2.72). No other significant differences between the VAD and VSGS were identified in their rates of infection (log OR 0.03, 95 % CI −0.77 to 0.84), obstruction (log OR 1.25, 95 % CI −0.21 to 2.71), ventriculoperitoneal shunt dependence (log OR −0.06, 95 % CI −0.93 to 0.82), subsequent shunt infection (log OR 0.23, 95 % CI −0.61 to 1.06), mortality (log OR 0.37, 95 % CI −0.95 to 1.70) or long-term disability (p = 0.9). In all studies, there was a lack of standardised criteria, variations between surgeons in heterogeneous cohorts of limited sample size and a lack of neurodevelopmental follow-up. This affirms the importance of an ongoing multicentre, prospective pilot study comparing these two temporising procedures to enable a more robust comparison. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00381-015-2951-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015-11-11 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4749661/ /pubmed/26560885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2951-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review Paper
Fountain, Daniel M.
Chari, Aswin
Allen, Dominic
James, Greg
Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of the use of ventricular access devices and ventriculosubgaleal shunts in posthaemorrhagic hydrocephalus: systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4749661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26560885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2951-8
work_keys_str_mv AT fountaindanielm comparisonoftheuseofventricularaccessdevicesandventriculosubgalealshuntsinposthaemorrhagichydrocephalussystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chariaswin comparisonoftheuseofventricularaccessdevicesandventriculosubgalealshuntsinposthaemorrhagichydrocephalussystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT allendominic comparisonoftheuseofventricularaccessdevicesandventriculosubgalealshuntsinposthaemorrhagichydrocephalussystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT jamesgreg comparisonoftheuseofventricularaccessdevicesandventriculosubgalealshuntsinposthaemorrhagichydrocephalussystematicreviewandmetaanalysis