OUTCOMES OF VENTRICULOPERITONEAL SHUNT SURGERY USING ADJUSTABLE PRESSURE VALVES IN HYDROCEPHALUS PATIENTS AT THE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL FOR OCCUPATIONAL DISEASES, HO CHI MINH CITY

Quốc Thái Phùng1,2, , Văn Thái Trần1, Minh Phong Lê3
1 Bệnh viện Phục hồi chức năng – Điều trị bệnh nghề nghiệp TP. Hồ Chí Minh
2 Trường Đại học Y khoa Phạm Ngọc Thạch
3 Bệnh viện Quân y 175

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate outcomes of ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt surgery using externally adjustable pressure valves in hydrocephalus patients.


Subjects and methods: A retrospective descriptive case series with postoperative follow-up, conducted on 30 hydrocephalus patients who underwent VP shunt surgery with adjustable pressure valves, with a minimum follow-up of 6 months.


Results: Mean age was 41.9 ± 14.25 years; males accounted for 73.3%; traumatic brain injury was the most common etiology (66.7%). Preoperatively, 90.0% of patients were lethargic (GCS 9-13). The Polaris SPV (Sophysa) valve was used in 66.7% and Strata II (Medtronic) in 33.3% of cases. At 6 months, 80.0% required at least one valve adjustment. Neurological improvement increased from 40.0% at discharge to 83.3% at 6 months. Good GOS outcomes were achieved in 20.0% at 6 months. Overall complication rate was 33.3%, with shunt obstruction (16.7%) and infection (10.0%) being most frequent.


Conclusion: VP shunt with adjustable pressure valves enables non-surgical optimization of drainage, with progressive neurological improvement reaching 83.3% at 6 months. Shunt obstruction and infection remain the main complications requiring close monitoring.

Article Details

References

1. R, et al. (2018). Global hydrocephalus epidemiology and incidence: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosurg, 130(4):1065-1079.
2. Pollack IF, Albright AL, Adelson PD. (1999). A randomized, controlled study of a programmable shunt valve versus a conventional valve for patients with hydrocephalus. Hakim-Medos Investigator Group. Neurosurgery, 45(6):1399-1408; discussion 1408-1411.
3. Teasdale G, Jennett B. (1974). Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: a practical scale. Lancet, 2(7872):81-84.
4. Jennett B, Bond M. (1975). Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet, 1(7905):480-484.
5. Zemack G, Romner B. (2000). Seven years of clinical experience with the programmable Codman Hakim valve: a retrospective study of 583 patients. J Neurosurg, 92(6):941-948.
6. Reddy GK, Bollam P, Caldito G. (2014). Long-term outcomes of ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery in patients with hydrocephalus. World Neurosurg, 81(2):404-410.
7. Conen A, Walti LN, Merlo A, Fluckiger U, Battegay M, Trampuz A. (2008). Characteristics and treatment outcome of cerebrospinal fluid shunt-associated infections in adults: a retrospective analysis over an 11-year period. Clin Infect Dis, 47(1):73-82.
8. Piatt JH Jr, Carlson CV. (1993). A search for determinants of cerebrospinal fluid shunt survival: retrospective analysis of a 14-year institutional experience. Pediatr Neurosurg, 19(5):233-241; discussion 242