Pediatric Neurosurgery
Original Paper
Cerebrospinal Fluid Shunt Failure: Late Is Different from EarlyPiatt, Jr. J.H.Division of Neurosurgery and Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, Oreg., USA
|
|
Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
KAB
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Article / Publication Details
Received: February 01, 1995
Accepted: July 14, 1995
Published online: March 06, 2008
Issue release date: 1995
Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0
ISSN: 1016-2291 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0305 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/PNE
Abstract
Six hundred and seventy-one operations to insert or revise simple, linear cerebrospinal fluid shunts were performed in a single institution from 1976 through 1989. The results were analyzed using actuarial techniques. Failures within the first 8 months were defined as ‘early’, and subsequent failures were late’. Patient age did not quite attain significance as a determinant of the risk of late shunt failure (p = 0.054). The following factors had no effect on the risk of late failure: interval since last operation, etiology of hydrocephalus, identity of surgeon, burr hole site, type of valve, and whether the shunt was new or revised. Modes of shunt failure in the two phases were compared: there were proportionately more infections among early failures and proportionately more fractures/separations among late failures (chi-squared = 42.9, d.f. = 6, p < 0.000005). Shunts failing during the early phase were more often revised by removal and replacement of the entire system, whereas shunts failing later were more often revised by replacement of valve and/or abdominal catheter (chi-squared = 33.7, d.f. = 3, p < 0.000005). The late phase of shunt survival conformed very closely to an exponential decay model with a constant monthly risk of failure of 0.5% (r2 = 0.98). Contrary to intuition, cerebrospinal fluid shunts did not encounter increasing monthly risks of failure as they grew older. The contempt of familiarity has discouraged study of the mechanisms of shunt failure. Experience suggests that most early shunt failures are attributable to infection and other technical misadventures, but the mechanisms of late failure are distinct and incompletely understood.
© 1995 S. Karger AG, Basel
Related Articles:
Article / Publication Details
Received: February 01, 1995
Accepted: July 14, 1995
Published online: March 06, 2008
Issue release date: 1995
Number of Print Pages: 7
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0
ISSN: 1016-2291 (Print)
eISSN: 1423-0305 (Online)
For additional information: https://www.karger.com/PNE
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
Get Permission
PubMed ID
