Laparoscopy-assisted ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery in children: a series of 11 cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The use of laparoscopy-assisted placement of the distal catheter of a ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt has been well described in the literature, and several advantages of laparoscopy over laparotomy have been documented. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts of 11 consecutive children with hydrocephalus of various origins who underwent surgery for initial VP shunt placement or for revision of an existing VP shunt system between July 1, 2006, and December 31, 2006. The peritoneal catheter in all of these cases was implanted using a laparoscopic procedure and with the aid of a pediatric general surgeon. Laparoscopy-assisted placement of the distal catheter was successful in all patients. There were no periprocedural complications. There was one complication, an incisional hernia, noted in the short-term follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The authors illustrate that laparoscopy-assisted implantation of a peritoneal catheter is a safe, effective, minimally invasive, and technically easy approach for VP shunt placement or revision in children. It allows accurate placement of the distal catheter in the peritoneal cavity, enables retrieval of fractured catheter segments, and allows confirmation of the patency of the shunt system.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".