Endoscopic third ventriculostomy and choroid plexus cauterization in infants with hydrocephalus: a retrospective Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The use of endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) with choroid plexus cauterization (CPC) has been advocated as an alternative to CSF shunting in infants with hydrocephalus. There are limited reports of this procedure in the North American population, however. The authors provide a retrospective review of the experience with combined ETV + CPC within the North American Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network (HCRN). METHODS: All children (< 2 years old) who underwent an ETV + CPC at one of 7 HCRN centers before November 2012 were included. Data were collected retrospectively through review of hospital records and the HCRN registry. Comparisons were made to a contemporaneous cohort of 758 children who received their first shunt at < 2 years of age within the HCRN. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with ETV + CPC were included (13 with previous shunt). The etiologies of hydrocephalus were as follows: intraventricular hemorrhage of prematurity (9 patients), aqueductal stenosis (8), myelomeningocele (4), and other (15). There were no major intraoperative or early postoperative complications. There were 2 postoperative CSF infections. There were 2 deaths unrelated to hydrocephalus and 1 death from seizure. In 18 patients ETV + CPC failed at a median time of 30 days after surgery (range 4-484 days). The actuarial 3-, 6-, and 12-month success for ETV + CPC was 58%, 52%, and 52%. Time to treatment failure was slightly worse for the 36 patients with ETV + CPC compared with the 758 infants treated with shunts (p = 0.012). Near-complete CPC (≥ 90%) was achieved in 11 cases (31%) overall, but in 50% (10 of 20 cases) in 2012 versus 6% (1 of 16 cases) before 2012 (p = 0.009). Failure was higher in children with < 90% CPC (HR 4.39, 95% CI 0.999-19.2, p = 0.0501). CONCLUSIONS: The early North American multicenter experience with ETV + CPC in infants demonstrates that the procedure has reasonable safety in selected cases. The degree of CPC achieved might be associated with a surgeon's learning curve and appears to affect success, suggesting that surgeon training might improve results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".