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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".