Unusual presentation of a common neurosurgical shunt procedure in an adult patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery is one of the treatments of hydrocephalus. It involves placing a shunt from the cerebral ventricles to the peritoneum serving as a drainage point. Infection and catheter blockage are some of the possible complications resulting from this procedure. In some cases, other incidents such as peritoneal shunt migration have also been described. Here, we present the case of a 73-year-old male patient treated with ventriculoperitoneal shunt for a normal pressure hydrocephalus. After an initial blockage of the ventricular catheter, a revision surgery was performed with only mild improvement of his neurological symptoms. A repeat shunt series X-ray showed a migration of the distal catheter into the scrotum through an inguinal hernia. He was successfully treated with a laparoscopic repair of the inguinal hernia and repositioning of the distal catheter into the peritoneal cavity. Scrotal migration and hydrocele are unusual presentations and complications of ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Close follow-up of patients with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt should be performed if they experience worsening of their neurological symptoms. Shunt integrity should be assessed and any complications should be managed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".