COMPLICATIONS OF ENDOSCOPIC THIRD VENTRICULOSTOMY IN PREVIOUSLY SHUNTED PATIENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) is considered to be a safe and effective treatment in selected patients as an initial treatment for obstructive hydrocephalus and at the time of shunt malfunction in previously shunted patients. We compared the outcome and complications of ETV between patients with newly diagnosed hydrocephalus and those with previous shunting procedures. METHODS A retrospective review of patients undergoing ETV from 1996 to 2004 at Alberta's Childrens Hospital and Foothills Medical Centre was completed. Patient data included symptoms at clinical presentation, cause of hydrocephalus, age at initial shunt, number of previous shunt revisions, age at ETV, complications, and subsequent shunting procedures performed. RESULTS A total of 131 patients were identified with a minimum follow-up duration of 1 year; 71 (82.5%) of 86 patients who underwent ETV as a primary procedure and 36 (80%) of 45 patients who had ETV at the time of shunt malfunction were shunt-free at the last follow-up evaluation. Patients younger than 1 year old who underwent ETV were more likely to require an additional procedure for control of their hydrocephalus (P < 0.01). Serious complications after ETV occurred more frequently in patients who presented at the time of shunt malfunction (14 of 45 patients, 31%) compared with patients who underwent primary ETV (seven of 86 patients, 8%) (P = 0.02). Previously shunted patients with a history of two or more revisions (P = 0.03) and who experienced a serious complication at the time of ETV (P = 0.01) were more likely to require shunt replacement. CONCLUSION ETV is an effective treatment both in selected patients with newly diagnosed hydrocephalus and in patients with a previous shunting procedure who are presenting with malfunction. Complications of ETV occur more frequently in previously shunted patients than in patients treated for newly diagnosed hydrocephalus, and care must be taken in the selection and treatment of these patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".