To shunt or not to shunt when closing myelomeningocele? A systematic review and meta-analysis of simultaneous versus delayed ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement in neonates undergoing myelomeningocele closure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Approximately 70%-80% of children born with myelomeningocele develop hydrocephalus and need CSF diversion, commonly a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) placement. The optimal timing of surgery is not known, but many centers delay VPS placement and perform it in a separate surgery to avoid shunt complications, mainly shunt contamination and infection. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare shunt-related complications between populations with VPS surgery performed either simultaneously with myelomeningocele closure or with delay. METHODS: The authors searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases on December 15, 2022, and November 11, 2023, using a predefined search strategy. Randomized and nonrandomized trials of neonates undergoing postnatal myelomeningocele closure and VPS placement before the age of 29 days were included. Cases with prenatal myelomeningocele closure and hydrocephalus treatment other than a VPS were excluded. All studies were screened and assessed by two independent reviewers. The authors performed a meta-analysis pooling risk ratios (RRs) with a 95% CI using the random-effects model. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: After screening and a full-text review of 2099 database search results, 12 studies with a total number of 4894 patients were included. All studies were nonrandomized studies. Only 2 studies were ranked as good quality on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No statistically significant differences were found between simultaneous and delayed shunt insertion in terms of shunt infection (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41-1.42); shunt revision (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.19-1.30); overall mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.09-8.57); wound CSF leak (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03-1.23); or myelomeningocele wound dehiscence (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.07-3.71). In the subgroup analysis of studies conducted in high-income countries, simultaneous shunting was superior to delayed shunting concerning shunt infection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.31-0.78) and shunt revision (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis found no statistically significant differences in shunt-related complications between simultaneous and delayed VPS surgery in myelomeningocele-related hydrocephalus in neonates. The current literature does not support the common practice of delayed shunting or its alternative, simultaneous shunting.
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 | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".