MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401487765 · doi:10.3171/2024.5.peds23600

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

2024· review· en· W4401487765 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
O. Saarinen, Susanna Piironen, Tytti Pokka, Juha‐Jaakko Sinikumpu, Willy Serlo, Niina Salokorpi, Oula Knuutinen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Dysraphism and Malformations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShunt (medical)MedicineSurgeryMeta-analysisHydrocephalusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicSpinal Dysraphism and MalformationsFrench-language works237,207