Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 155, Issue 10, pp 1981–1985 | Cite as

Low-pressure hydrocephalus: indication for custom-made catheters? Technical report

  • L. GalbarriatuEmail author
  • M. Rivero-Garvía
  • M. Olivares
  • D. Miranda
  • I. Pomposo
  • J. Márquez-Rivas
Technical Note - Neurosurgical Techniques



Low-pressure hydrocephalus (LPH) is characterized by ventriculomegaly with persistent low intracranial pressure (ICP). Sub-zero drainage is needed for its management and multiple solutions have been described. Our aim is to report our experience with custom-made peritoneal catheters with larger inner diameter as an alternative treatment option.


We made a retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with LPH and treated with custom-made peritoneal catheters at the Virgen del Rocío Pediatric Neurosurgical Unit. Catheters were coated with antibiotic or silver. The inner diameter of ventricular catheters was 1.4 mm; peritoneal catheters were larger than usual (1.9 mm inner diameter).


We identified four patients in whom five custom-made peritoneal catheters were used over a 3-year period. There were two males and the mean age was 10 years (6 months–17 years). In all patients, placement of an EVD was necessary for sub-zero drainage, with maximum negative pressure of −8 cm H20. The mean time of maintenance of EVD was 102 days (10 days–1 year). Finally, three ventriculoperitoneal (VP) valveless systems, one with antigravitation device, and one Pro-GAV VP shunt were placed, all of them with larger custom-made peritoneal catheters. After a mean follow-up period of 2.3 years (6 months–3 years), two patients are completely recovered, one patient is partially dependent for daily activities with good cognitive status, and the last one is a child who died due to his brain tumor.


The custom-made peritoneal catheters with larger inner diameter could be a good option for the management of this complex pathology.


Custom-made catheters Low pressure hydrocephalus Treatment 


Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Akins PT, Guppy KH, Axelrod YV, Chakrabarti I, Silverthorn J, Williams AR (2011) The genesis of low pressure hydrocephalus. Neurocrit Care 15(3):461–468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bannister CM (1972) A report of eight patients with low pressure hydrocephalus treated by C.S.F. diversion with disappointing results. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 27(1):11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clarke MJ, Maher CO, Nothdurft G, Meyer F (2006) Very low pressure hydrocephalus. Report of two cases. J Neurosurg 105(3):475–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Daniel RT, Lee GY, Halcrow SJ (2002) Low-pressure hydrocephalic state complicating hemispherectomy: a case report. Epilepsia 43(5):563–565PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dias MS, Li V, Pollina J (1999) Low-pressure shunt malfunction following lumbar puncture in children with shunted obstructive hydrocephalus. Pediatr Neurosurg 30(3):146–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ingram TT (1971) Low-pressure hydrocephalus. Dev Med Child Neurol 13(5):676PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lesniak MS, Clatterbuck RE, Rigamonti D, Williams MA (2002) Low pressure hydrocephalus and ventriculomegaly: hysteresis, non-linear dynamics, and the benefits of CSF diversion. Br J Neurosurg 16(6):555–561PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Owler BK, Jacobson EE, Johnston IH (2001) Low pressure hydrocephalus: issues of diagnosis and treatment in five cases. Br J Neurosurg 15(4):353–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pang D, Altschuler E (1994) Low-pressure hydrocephalic state and viscoelastic alterations in the brain. Neurosurgery 35(4):643–655, discussion 55–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rivero-Garvia M, Marquez-Rivas J, Jimenez-Mejias ME, Neth O, Rueda-Torres AB (2011) Reduction in external ventricular drain infection rate. Impact of a minimal handling protocol and antibiotic-impregnated catheters. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 153(3):647–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Singounas EG, Krasanakis C, Karvounis PC (1976) Observations on the pathogenesis of low pressure hydrocephalus. Analysis of 25 cases. Neurochirurgia (Stuttg) 19(1):22–25Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trinh VT, Duckworth EA (2013) Revision to an adjustable non-siphon control valve in low pressure hydrocephalus: therapeutic siphoning and a new perspective on NPH: series of 3 cases and review of the literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 115(2):175–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vassilyadi M, Farmer JP, Montes JL (1995) Negative-pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 83(3):486–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Galbarriatu
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • M. Rivero-Garvía
    • 2
  • M. Olivares
    • 2
  • D. Miranda
    • 3
  • I. Pomposo
    • 1
  • J. Márquez-Rivas
    • 2
  1. 1.Neurosurgery DepartmentCruces University HospitalBilbaoSpain
  2. 2.Neurosurgery DepartmentVirgen del Rocío University HospitalSevilleSpain
  3. 3.Neurosurgery DepartmentComplejo Hospitalario SalamancaSalamancaSpain
  4. 4.Neurosurgery DepartmentCruces University HospitalBarakaldoSpain

Personalised recommendations