Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Success criteria in pediatric neuroendoscopic procedures. Proposal for classification of results after 67 operations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Child's Nervous System Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Controversial issues exist concerning criteria for patient selection and long-term success in pediatric neuroendoscopic procedures. We designed a classification of success grades applicable to high-pressure and chronic hydrocephalus and also to those cases in which different endoscopic maneuvers are performed during the same procedure. We then evaluated the success rate and complications in our series.

Methods

A total of 59 patients underwent 67 neuroendoscopic procedures between January 2003 and January 2011. A retrospective study was made of the preoperative history, operative reports, and postoperative imaging findings and medical records. A 5-grade scale was developed to assess the type of success depending on clinical and radiological data. Complications related to the surgical procedure were also recorded.

Results

Two patients were excluded from the success analysis due to insufficient follow-up time. The final results for the first procedures in 57 patients were complete and permanent success (grade I) in 49.1%, complete but transitory success (grade II) in 10.5%, partial success (grade III) in 12.3%, doubtful success (grade IV) in 5.3%, and failure (grade V) in 22.8%. In eight cases a second procedure followed the failure of the first: grade I success was achieved in seven cases (87.5%) and grade V in one case (12.5%). The highest success rates were achieved in cases of hydrocephalus caused by tumors or arachnoid cysts and the lowest in slit ventricle syndrome.

Conclusions

A common classification of degrees of success, such as that proposed here, would aid the development of comparative and cooperative studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Teo C, Jones R (1996) Management of hydrocephalus by endoscopic third ventriculostomy in patients with myelomeningocele. Pediatr Neurosurg 25(2):57–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Di Rocco C, Massimi L, Tamburrini G (2006) Shunts vs endoscopic third ventriculostomy in infants: are there different types and/or complications? A review. Childs Nerv Syst 22(12):1573–1589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gangemi M, Maiuri F, Buonamassa S, Colella G, de Divitiis E (2004) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 55(1):129–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Singh I, Haris M, Husain M, Husain N, Rastogi M, Gupta RK (2008) Role of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in patients with communicating hydrocephalus: an evaluation with MR ventriculography. Neurosurg Rev 31(3):319–325

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Greitz D (2007) Paradigm shift in hydrocephalus research in legacy of Dandy’s pioneering work: rationale for third ventriculostomy in communicating hydrocephalus. Childs Nerv Syst 23(5):487–489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cinalli G (2006) Impact of neuroendoscopy on the treatment of pediatric hydrocephalus. Rev Neurosurg. vol 1, no. 1. http://www.wfns.org/principal_reviews2-1c.html. Accessed 7 Aug 2006

  7. Meling TR, Tiller C, Due-Tønnessen BJ, Egge PK, Frøslie KF, Lundar T, Helseth E (2007) Audits can improve neurosurgical practice—illustrated by endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Pediatr Neurosurg 43(6):482–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cinalli G, Sainte-Rose C, Chumas P, Zerah M, Brunelle F, Lot G, Pierre-Khan A, Renier D (1999) Failure of third ventriculostomy in the treatment of aqueductal stenosis in children. J Neurosurg 6(4):e3

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Goumnerova LC, Frim DM (1997) Treatment of hydrocephalus with third ventriculocisternostomy: outcome and CSF flow patterns. Pediatr Neurosurg 27(3):149–152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fischbein NJ, Ciricillo SF, Barr RM, McDermott M, Edwards MS, Geary S, Barkovich AJ (1998) Endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy: MR assessment of patency with 2-D cine phase-contrast versus T2-weighted fast spin echo technique. Pediatr Neurosurg 28(2):70–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bargalló N, Olondo L, Garcia AI, Capurro S, Caral L, Rumia J (2005) Functional analysis of third ventriculostomy patency by quantification of CSF stroke volume by using cine phase-contrast MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol 26(10):2514–2521

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Depreitere B, Dasi N, Rutka J, Dirks P, Drake J (2007) Endoscopic biopsy for intraventricular tumors in children. J Neurosurg 106(5 Suppl):340–346

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kulkarni AV, Drake JM, Mallucci CL, Sgouros S, Roth J, Constantini S (2009) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in the treatment of childhood hydrocephalus. J Pediatr 155(2):254–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Koch D, Wagner W (2004) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in infants of less than 1 year of age: which factors influence the outcome? Childs Nerv Syst 20(6):405–411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bognar L, Markia B, Novak L (2005) Retrospective analysis of 400 neuroendoscopic interventions: the Hungarian experience. Neurosurg Focus 19(6):E10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kadrian D, van Gelder J, Florida D, Jones R, Vonau M, Teo C, Stening W, Kwok B (2005) Long-term reliability of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Neurosurgery J56(6):1271–1278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wagner W, Koch D (2005) Mechanisms of failure after endoscopic third ventriculostomy in young infants. J Neurosurg 103(1 Suppl):43–49

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Navarro R, Gil-Parra R, Reitman AJ, Olavarria G, Grant JA, Tomita T (2006) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in children: early and late complications and their avoidance. Childs Nerv Syst 22(5):506–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Drake JM (2007) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in pediatric patients: the Canadian experience. Neurosurgery 60(5):881–886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Greenfield JP, Hoffman C, Kuo E, Christos PJ, Souweidane MM (2008) Intraoperative assessment of ETV success. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2(5):298–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Oertel JM, Baldauf J, Schroeder HW, Gaab MR (2009) Endoscopic options in children: experience with 134 procedures. J Neurosurg Pediatr 3(2):81–89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kulkarny AV, Drake JM, Kestle JRW, Mallucci CL, Sgouros S, Constantini S (2010) Predicting who will benefit from ETV compared with shunt insertion in childhood hydrocephalus using the ETV Success Score. J Neurosurg Pediatr 6(4):310–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Buxton N, Macarthur D, Mallucci C, Punt J, Vloeberghs M (1998) Neuroendoscopic third ventriculostomy in patients less than 1 year old. Pediatr Neurosurg 29(2):73–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Beems T, Grotenhuis JA (2002) Is the success rate of endoscopic third ventriculostomy age-dependent? An analysis of the results of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in young children. Childs Nerv Syst 18(11):605–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gorayeb RP, Cavalheiro S, Zymberg ST (2004) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in children younger than 1 year of age. J Neurosurg 100(5 Suppl Pediatrics):427–429

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fritsch MJ, Kienke S, Ankermann T, Padoin M, Mehdorn HM (2005) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in infants. J Neurosurg 103(1 Suppl):50–53

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. O’Brien DF, Seghedoni A, Collins DR, Hayhurst C, Mallucci CL (2006) Is there an indication for ETV in young infants in aetiologies other than isolated aqueduct stenosis? Childs Nerv Syst 22(12):1565–1572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lipina R, Reguli S, Dolezilová V, Kuncíková M, Podesvová H (2008) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for obstructive hydrocephalus in children younger than 6 months of age: is it a first-choice method? Childs Nerv Syst 24(9):1021–1027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Faggin R, Bernardo A, Stieg P, Perilongo G, d’Avella D (2009) Hydrocephalus in infants less than six months of age: effectiveness of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Eur J Pediatr Surg 19(4):216–219

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ogiwara H, Dipatri AJ Jr, Alden TD, Bowman RM, Tomita T (2010) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for obstructive hydrocephalus in children younger than 6 months of age. Childs Nerv Syst 26(3):343–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Oi S, Di Rocco C (2006) Proposal of “evolution theory in cerebrospinal fluid dynamics” and minor pathway hydrocephalus in developing in mature brain. Childs Nerv Syst 22(7):662–669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ray P, Jallo GI, Kim RYH, Kim BS, Wilson S, Kothbauer K, Abbott R (2005) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for tumor-related hydrocephalus in a pediatric population. Neurosurg Focus 19(6):1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Marlin AE (2004) Management of hydrocephalus in the patient with myelomeningocele: an argument against third ventriculostomy. Neurosurg Focus 16(2):E4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Foltz EL, Shurtleff DB (1966) Conversion of communicating hydrocephalus to stenosis or occlusion of the aqueduct during ventricular shunt. J Neurosurg 24(2):520–529

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Fukuhara T, Vorster SJ, Luciano MG (2000) Risk factors for failure of endoscopic third ventriculostomy for obstructive hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 46(5):1100–1111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Buxton N, Ho KJ, Macarthur D, Vloeberghs M, Punt J, Robertson I (2001) Neuroendoscopic third ventriculostomy for hydrocephalus in adults: report of a single unit’s experience with 63 cases. Surg Neurol 55(2):74–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Scarrow AM, Levy EI, Pascucci L, Albright AL (2000) Outcome analysis of endoscopic III ventriculostomy. Childs Nerv Syst 16(7):442–445

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tisell M, Almström O, Stephensen H, Tullberg M, Wikkelsö C (2000) How effective is endoscopic third ventriculostomy in treating adult hydrocephalus caused by primary aqueductal stenosis? Neurosurgery 46(1):104–111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Cinalli G, Salazar C, Mallucci C, Yada JZ, Zerah M, Sainte-Rose C (1998) The role of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in the management of shunt malfunction. Neurosurgery 43(6):1323–1329

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Warf B, Mugamba J, Kulkarni AV (2010) ETV in the treatment of childhood hydrocephalus in Uganda: report of a scoring system that predict success. J Neurosurg Pediatr 5(2):143–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Cinalli G, Spennato P, Ruggiero C, Aliberti F, Trischitta V, Buonocore MC, Cianciulli E, Maggi G (2007) Complications following endoscopic intracranial procedures in children. Childs Nerv Syst 23(6):633–644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jones RF, Kwok BC, Stening WA, Vonau M (1994) The current status of ETV in the management of non-communicating hydrocephalus. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 37(1):28–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Baldauf J, Oertel J, Gaab MR, Schroeder HW (2007) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in children younger than 2 years of age. Childs Nerv Syst 23(6):623–626

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Boschert J, Hellwig D, Krauss JK (2003) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for shunt dysfunction in occlusive hydrocephalus: long-term follow up and review. J Neurosurg 98(5):1032–1039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Idowu O, Doherty A, Tiamiyu O (2008) Initial experience with endoscopic third ventriculostomy in Nigeria, West Africa. Childs Nerv Syst 24(2):253–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Mohanty A, Vasudev MK, Sampath S, Radhesh S, Sastry Kolluri VR (2002) Failed endoscopic third ventriculostomy in children: management options. Pediatr Neurosurg 37(6):304–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Bellotti A, Rapanà A, Iaccarino C, Schonauer M (2001) Intracranial pressure monitoring after endoscopic third ventriculostomy: an effective method to manage the ‘adaptation period’. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 103(4):223–227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Bilginer B, Oguz KK, Akalan N (2009) Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for malfunction in previously shunted infants. Childs Nerv Syst 25(6):683–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. King JAJ, Auguste KI, Halliday W, Drake JM, Kulkarni AV (2010) Ventriculocystostomy and endoscopic third ventriculostomy/shunt placement in the management of hydrocephalus secondary to giant retrocerebellar cysts in infancy. J Neurosurg Pediatr 5(4):403–407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pediatric Neurosurgery Section, Department of Neurosurgery, HRU Carlos Haya, Málaga, Spain

    Bienvenido Ros & Sandra Pérez

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, HRU Carlos Haya, Malaga, Spain

    Lorena Romero, Guillermo Ibáñez, Sara Iglesias & Miguel A. Arráez

  3. Statistics Department, Malaga University, Malaga, Spain

    Francisca Rius

Authors
  1. Bienvenido Ros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorena Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guillermo Ibáñez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sara Iglesias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francisca Rius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sandra Pérez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Miguel A. Arráez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bienvenido Ros.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ros, B., Romero, L., Ibáñez, G. et al. Success criteria in pediatric neuroendoscopic procedures. Proposal for classification of results after 67 operations. Childs Nerv Syst 28, 691–697 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-012-1689-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-012-1689-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation