Silvia Tatiana Quintero, Felipe Ramirez-Velandia, Andres Felipe Hortua Moreno, Lina Vera, Paula Rugeles, Rafael Augusto Azuero Gonzalez
{"title":"颈内静脉闭塞时的脑室-心房分流术:手术经验和手术技巧。","authors":"Silvia Tatiana Quintero, Felipe Ramirez-Velandia, Andres Felipe Hortua Moreno, Lina Vera, Paula Rugeles, Rafael Augusto Azuero Gonzalez","doi":"10.1186/s41016-023-00354-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ventricular shunts are one of the most frequent techniques used for the management of hydrocephalus. The ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) is the most commonly performed procedure, and the ventriculoatrial shunt (VAS) is the second option in most medical centers. The main objective of this study is to introduce and describe a surgical approach for VAS outlining our experience and comparing it with traditional shunting techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort comparison study, we included patients with hydrocephalus treated with a surgical procedure between January 2010 and February 2021 at a single academic institution. We categorized the procedures into two groups: patients with VPS and conventional VAS grouped together into the conventional technique (CT) group, and the second group was patients with whom we performed VAS with complete internal jugular vein occlusion (IJVOT). We compared the surgical time, postoperative complications, and occurrence of shunt failure among the groups by performing univariate analysis using the Fisher exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of the 106 patients included in the analysis, IJVOT was performed in 66 patients, and CT in 40 patients. The median surgical time was 60 min (IQR 60-90) for IJVOT versus 100 min (IQR 60-120) for CT (p < 0.01). In the follow-up a month after the procedure, 83.3% of patients with IJVOT and 62.5% of patients with CT did not require shunt removal or shunt revision (p < 0.01). Shunt revision rates were 12.5% and 1.5% for CT while 1.5% and 2.5% for IJVOT at 1 and 6 months after the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings demonstrate that VAS with IJVOT is a safe method that exhibited shorter surgical times and outcomes comparable to CT. However, since the present study represents the first cohort evaluating IJVOT, it is imperative to conduct larger prospective studies, along with clinical trials, to fully explore and establish efficacy, long-term outcomes, and an in-depth comparison among shunting techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":36700,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10785543/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ventriculo-atrial shunt with occlusion of the internal jugular vein: operative experience and surgical technique.\",\"authors\":\"Silvia Tatiana Quintero, Felipe Ramirez-Velandia, Andres Felipe Hortua Moreno, Lina Vera, Paula Rugeles, Rafael Augusto Azuero Gonzalez\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41016-023-00354-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ventricular shunts are one of the most frequent techniques used for the management of hydrocephalus. The ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) is the most commonly performed procedure, and the ventriculoatrial shunt (VAS) is the second option in most medical centers. The main objective of this study is to introduce and describe a surgical approach for VAS outlining our experience and comparing it with traditional shunting techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort comparison study, we included patients with hydrocephalus treated with a surgical procedure between January 2010 and February 2021 at a single academic institution. We categorized the procedures into two groups: patients with VPS and conventional VAS grouped together into the conventional technique (CT) group, and the second group was patients with whom we performed VAS with complete internal jugular vein occlusion (IJVOT). We compared the surgical time, postoperative complications, and occurrence of shunt failure among the groups by performing univariate analysis using the Fisher exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of the 106 patients included in the analysis, IJVOT was performed in 66 patients, and CT in 40 patients. The median surgical time was 60 min (IQR 60-90) for IJVOT versus 100 min (IQR 60-120) for CT (p < 0.01). In the follow-up a month after the procedure, 83.3% of patients with IJVOT and 62.5% of patients with CT did not require shunt removal or shunt revision (p < 0.01). Shunt revision rates were 12.5% and 1.5% for CT while 1.5% and 2.5% for IJVOT at 1 and 6 months after the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings demonstrate that VAS with IJVOT is a safe method that exhibited shorter surgical times and outcomes comparable to CT. However, since the present study represents the first cohort evaluating IJVOT, it is imperative to conduct larger prospective studies, along with clinical trials, to fully explore and establish efficacy, long-term outcomes, and an in-depth comparison among shunting techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10785543/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-023-00354-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-023-00354-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:脑室分流术是治疗脑积水最常用的技术之一。在大多数医疗中心,脑室腹腔分流术(VPS)是最常用的手术,而脑室心房分流术(VAS)则是第二选择。本研究的主要目的是介绍和描述 VAS 的手术方法,概述我们的经验,并将其与传统的分流技术进行比较:在这项回顾性队列比较研究中,我们纳入了 2010 年 1 月至 2021 年 2 月期间在一家学术机构接受手术治疗的脑积水患者。我们将手术分为两组:一组是采用 VPS 和传统 VAS 的患者,并将其归入传统技术(CT)组;另一组是采用完全颈内静脉闭塞(IJVOT)的 VAS 患者。我们通过费舍尔精确检验进行单变量分析,比较了各组之间的手术时间、术后并发症和分流失败发生率:在纳入分析的 106 名患者中,66 名患者进行了 IJVOT,40 名患者进行了 CT。IJVOT 的中位手术时间为 60 分钟(IQR 60-90),而 CT 的中位手术时间为 100 分钟(IQR 60-120):我们的研究结果表明,采用 IJVOT 的 VAS 是一种安全的方法,手术时间更短,手术效果与 CT 相当。然而,由于本研究是首个对 IJVOT 进行评估的队列研究,因此必须开展更大规模的前瞻性研究和临床试验,以全面探讨和确定疗效、长期预后,并对各种分流技术进行深入比较。
Ventriculo-atrial shunt with occlusion of the internal jugular vein: operative experience and surgical technique.
Background: Ventricular shunts are one of the most frequent techniques used for the management of hydrocephalus. The ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) is the most commonly performed procedure, and the ventriculoatrial shunt (VAS) is the second option in most medical centers. The main objective of this study is to introduce and describe a surgical approach for VAS outlining our experience and comparing it with traditional shunting techniques.
Methods: In this retrospective cohort comparison study, we included patients with hydrocephalus treated with a surgical procedure between January 2010 and February 2021 at a single academic institution. We categorized the procedures into two groups: patients with VPS and conventional VAS grouped together into the conventional technique (CT) group, and the second group was patients with whom we performed VAS with complete internal jugular vein occlusion (IJVOT). We compared the surgical time, postoperative complications, and occurrence of shunt failure among the groups by performing univariate analysis using the Fisher exact test.
Results: Out of the 106 patients included in the analysis, IJVOT was performed in 66 patients, and CT in 40 patients. The median surgical time was 60 min (IQR 60-90) for IJVOT versus 100 min (IQR 60-120) for CT (p < 0.01). In the follow-up a month after the procedure, 83.3% of patients with IJVOT and 62.5% of patients with CT did not require shunt removal or shunt revision (p < 0.01). Shunt revision rates were 12.5% and 1.5% for CT while 1.5% and 2.5% for IJVOT at 1 and 6 months after the procedure.
Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that VAS with IJVOT is a safe method that exhibited shorter surgical times and outcomes comparable to CT. However, since the present study represents the first cohort evaluating IJVOT, it is imperative to conduct larger prospective studies, along with clinical trials, to fully explore and establish efficacy, long-term outcomes, and an in-depth comparison among shunting techniques.