Does pre-resection endoscopic third ventriculostomy prevent the need for post-resection CSF diversion after pediatric posterior fossa tumor excision? A historical cohort study and review of the literature
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Children with posterior fossa tumors (PFTs) may present with hydrocephalus. Persistent (or new) hydrocephalus is common after PFT resection. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) is sometimes performed prior to resection to 1) temporize hydrocephalus prior to resection and 2) prophylactically treat post-resection hydrocephalus. The objective of this study was to establish, in a historical cohort study of pediatric patients who underwent primary craniotomy for PFT resection, whether or not pre-resection ETV prevents the need for post-resection CSF diversion to manage hydrocephalus. METHODS: The authors interrogated their prospectively maintained surgical neuro-oncology database to find all primary PFT resections from a single tertiary pediatric neurosurgery unit. These data were reviewed and supplemented with data from case notes and radiological review. The modified Canadian Preoperative Prediction Rule for Hydrocephalus (mCPPRH) score was retrospectively calculated for all patients. The primary outcome was the need for any form of postoperative CSF diversion within 6 months of PFT resection (including ventriculoperitoneal shunting, ETV, external ventricular drainage [EVD], and lumbar drainage [LD]). This was considered an ETV failure in the ETV group. The secondary outcomes were time to CSF diversion, shunt dependence at 6 months, and complications of ETV. Statistical analysis was done in RStudio, with significance defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were included in the study. There were 28 patients in the ETV group and 67 in the non-ETV group. Patients in the ETV group were younger (median age 5 vs 7 years, p = 0.04) and had more severe preoperative hydrocephalus (mean frontal-occipital horn ratio 0.45 vs 0.41 in the non-ETV group, p = 0.003) and higher mCPPRH scores (mean 4.42 vs 2.66, p < 0.001). The groups were similar in terms of sex and tumor histology. The overall rate of post-resection CSF diversion of any kind (shunt, repeat ETV, LD, or EVD) in the entire cohort was 25.26%. Post-resection CSF diversion was needed in 32% of patients in the ETV group and in 22% of the patients in the non-ETV group (p > 0.05). Shunt dependence at 6 months was seen in 21% of the ETV group and 16% of the non-ETV group (p > 0.05). The median time to ETV failure was 9 days. ETV failure correlated with patients with ependymoma (p = 0.02). Children who had ETV failure had higher mCPPRH scores than the ETV success group (5.67 vs 3.84, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-resection ETV did not reliably prevent the need for post-resection CSF diversion. ETV was more likely to fail in children with ependymoma and those with higher mCPPRH scores. Based on the findings of this study, the authors will change the practice at their institution; pre-resection ETV will now be performed based on a newly defined protocol.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».