4.6 Article

Shunt Failure-The First 30 Days

期刊

NEUROSURGERY
卷 87, 期 1, 页码 123-129

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyz379

关键词

Hydrocephalus; shunt surgery; failure; malfunction; predictors; 30-d

资金

  1. Jackson Fogelman Pediatric Neurosurgery Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Incontrovertible predictors of shunt malfunction remain elusive. OBJECTIVE: To determine predictors of shunt failure within 30 d of index surgery. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study from January 2010 through November 2016. Using a ventricular shunt surgery research database, clinical and procedural variables were procured. An index surgery was defined as implantation of a new shunt or revision or augmentation of an existing shunt system. The primary outcome was shunt failure of any kind within the first 30 days of index surgery. Bivariate models were created, followed by a final multivariable logistic regression model using a backward-forward selection procedure. RESULTS: Our dataset contained 655 unique patients with a total of 1206 operations. The median age for the cohort at the time of first shunt surgery was 4.6 yr (range, 0-28; first and third quartile, .37 and 11.8, respectively). The 30-day failure rates were 12.4% when analyzing the first-index operation only (81/655), and 15.7% when analyzing all-index operations (189/1206). Small or slit ventricles at the time of index surgery and prior ventricular shunt operations were found to be significant covariates in both the first-index (P < .01 and P = .05, respectively) and all-index (P = .02 and P < .01, respectively) multivariable models. Intraventricular hemorrhage at the time of index surgery was an additional predictor in the all-index model (P = .01). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that only 3 variables are predictive of 30-day shunt failure when following established variable selection procedures, 2 of which are potentially under direct control of the surgeon.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据