Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ventriculoperitoneal shunt complications in hydrocephalus patients with intracranial tumors: an analysis of relevant risk factors

  • Clinical Study - Patient Study
  • Published:
Journal of Neuro-Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patients with intracranial tumors are predisposed to persistent hydrocephalus, often requiring a permanent CSF diversion procedure with shunts. This study reviews the long-term experience with ventriculoperitoneal shunts for the management of hydrocephalus in patients with intracranial tumors. Patients with intracranial tumors who underwent ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement for hydrocephalus from October 1990 to October 2009 were included in this study. During the 19-year period, medical charts, operative reports, imaging studies, and clinical follow- up evaluations were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively for all patients. A total of 187 intracranial tumor patients with hydrocephalus were included. The median follow up was 391 days. Malignant tumors were present in 40% of the patients. Overall shunt failure was 27.8%. Single shunt revision occurred in 13% of the patients and 14% had multiple shunt revision. Tumor histology, age and a procedure prior to shunt placement (ventriculostomy/Ommaya reservoirs) were significantly associated with the shunt revisions. Shunt system replacement and proximal shunt complication were significantly attributed to multiple shunt revisions. The overall shunt revision within 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and 5 years was 17.7%, 18.7%, 19.8% and 24.1%, respectively. The results of the study demonstrate that VP shunting is an effective for the management of hydrocephalus in patients with intracranial tumors. The overall incidence of shunt revision was 27.8%. Age, tumor histology, and a procedure prior to shunt placement (ventriculostomy/Ommaya reservoirs) were significantly associated with the shunt revisions. Additional studies using minimally invasive techniques are being explored for the management of hydrocephalus in patients with intracranial tumors.

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. 1a
Fig. 1b
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rekate HL (2009) A contemporary definition and classification of hydrocephalus. Semin Pediatr Neurol 16:9–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Riva-Cambrin J, Detsky AS, Lamberti-Pasculli M, Sargent MA, Armstrong D, Moineddin R, Cochrane DD, Drake JM (2009) Predicting postresection hydrocephalus in pediatric patients with posterior fossa tumors. J Neurosurg Pediatr 3:378–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bergsneider M, Miller C, Vespa PM, Hu X (2008) Surgical management of adult hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 62(Suppl 2):643–659 discussion 659–660

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Due-Tonnessen BJ, Helseth E (2007) Management of hydrocephalus in children with posterior fossa tumors: role of tumor surgery. Pediatr Neurosurg 43:92–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Griwan MS, Sharma BS, Mahajan RK, Kak VK (1993) Value of precraniotomy shunts in children with posterior fossa tumours. Childs Nerv Syst 9:462–465 discussion 466

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Van Calenbergh F, Goffin J, Casaer P, Plets C (1996) Use of a ventriculosubgaleal shunt in the management of hydrocephalus in children with posterior fossa tumors. Childs Nerv Syst 12:34–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Piatt JH Jr, Garton HJ (2008) Clinical diagnosis of ventriculoperitoneal shunt failure among children with hydrocephalus. Pediatr Emerg Care 24:201–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhasin RR, Chen MK, Pincus DW (2007) Salvaging the “lost peritoneum” after ventriculoatrial shunt failures. Childs Nerv Syst 23:483–486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang J, Qu C, Wang Z, Wang C, Ding X, Pan S, Ji Y (2009) Improved ventriculoatrial shunt for cerebrospinal fluid diversion after multiple ventriculoperitoneal shunt failures. Surg Neurol 72(Suppl 1):S29–S33 discussion S33-24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Prusseit J, Simon M, von der Brelie C, Heep A, Molitor E, Volz S, Simon A (2009) Epidemiology, prevention and management of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infections in children. Pediatr Neurosurg 45:325–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Simon TD, Hall M, Riva-Cambrin J, Albert JE, Jeffries HE, Lafleur B, Dean JM, Kestle JR (2009) Infection rates following initial cerebrospinal fluid shunt placement across pediatric hospitals in the United States. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Pediatr 4:156–165

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wu Y, Green NL, Wrensch MR, Zhao S, Gupta N (2007) Ventriculoperitoneal shunt complications in California: 1990 to 2000. Neurosurgery 61:557–562 discussion 562–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stein SC, Guo W (2008) Have we made progress in preventing shunt failure? A critical analysis. J Neurosurg Pediatr 1:40–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Farahmand D, Hilmarsson H, Hogfeldt M, Tisell M (2009) Perioperative risk factors for short term shunt revisions in adult hydrocephalus patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 80:1248–1253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tuli S, Drake J, Lawless J, Wigg M, Lamberti-Pasculli M (2000) Risk factors for repeated cerebrospinal shunt failures in pediatric patients with hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 92:31–38

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoh BL, Lang SS, Ortiz MV, Chi YY, Lewis SB, Pincus DW (2008) Lower incidence of reoperation with longer shunt survival with adult ventriculoperitoneal shunts placed for hemorrhage-related hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 63:70–74 discussion 74–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Raimondi AJ, Tomita T (1981) Hydrocephalus and infratentorial tumors. Incidence, clinical picture, and treatment. J Neurosurg 55:174–182

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rogg JM, Ahn SH, Tung GA, Reinert SE, Noren G (2005) Prevalence of hydrocephalus in 157 patients with vestibular schwannoma. Neuroradiology 47:344–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mangubat EZ, Chan M, Ruland S, Roitberg BZ (2009) Hydrocephalus in posterior fossa lesions: ventriculostomy and permanent shunt rates by diagnosis. Neurol Res 31:668–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Santos de Oliveira R, Barros Juca CE, Valera ET, Machado HR (2008) Hydrocephalus in posterior fossa tumors in children. Are there factors that determine a need for permanent cerebrospinal fluid diversion? Childs Nerv Syst 24:1397–1403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kumar V, Phipps K, Harkness W, Hayward RD (1996) Ventriculo-peritoneal shunt requirement in children with posterior fossa tumours: an 11-year audit. Br J Neurosurg 10:467–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bhatia R, Tahir M, Chandler CL (2009) The management of hydrocephalus in children with posterior fossa tumours: the role of pre-resectional endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Pediatr Neurosurg 45:186–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Morelli D, Pirotte B, Lubansu A, Detemmerman D, Aeby A, Fricx C, Berre J, David P, Brotchi J (2005) Persistent hydrocephalus after early surgical management of posterior fossa tumors in children: is routine preoperative endoscopic third ventriculostomy justified? J Neurosurg 103:247–252

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sainte-Rose C, Cinalli G, Roux FE, Maixner R, Chumas PD, Mansour M, Carpentier A, Bourgeois M, Zerah M, Pierre-Kahn A, Renier D (2001) Management of hydrocephalus in pediatric patients with posterior fossa tumors: the role of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg 95:791–797

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ringel F, Schramm J, Meyer B (2005) Comparison of programmable shunt valves vs standard valves for communicating hydrocephalus of adults: a retrospective analysis of 407 patients. Surg Neurol 63:36–41 discussion 41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lund-Johansen M, Svendsen F, Wester K (1994) Shunt failures and complications in adults as related to shunt type, diagnosis, and the experience of the surgeon. Neurosurgery 35:839–844 discussion 844

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lam CH, Villemure JG (1997) Comparison between ventriculoatrial and ventriculoperitoneal shunting in the adult population. Br J Neurosurg 11:43–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Liptak GS, McDonald JV (1985) Ventriculoperitoneal shunts in children: factors affecting shunt survival. Pediatr Neurosci 12:289–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Di Rocco C, Marchese E, Velardi F (1991) A survey of the first complication of newly implanted CSF shunt devices for the treatment of nontumoral hydrocephalus. Cooperative survey of the 1991–1992 Education Committee of the ISPN. Childs Nerv Syst 10:321–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Winston KR, Lopez JA, Freeman J (2006) CSF shunt failure with stable normal ventricular size. Pediatr Neurosurg 42:151–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Piatt JH Jr (1995) Cerebrospinal fluid shunt failure: late is different from early. Pediatr Neurosurg 23:133–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sainte-Rose C, Piatt JH, Renier D, Pierre-Kahn A, Hirsch JF, Hoffman HJ, Humphreys RP, Hendrick EB (1991) Mechanical complications in shunts. Pediatr Neurosurg 17:2–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Aryan HE, Meltzer HS, Park MS, Bennett RL, Jandial R, Levy ML (2005) Initial experience with antibiotic-impregnated silicone catheters for shunting of cerebrospinal fluid in children. Childs Nerv Syst 21:56–61

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pattavilakom A, Xenos C, Bradfield O, Danks RA (2007) Reduction in shunt infection using antibiotic impregnated CSF shunt catheters: an Australian prospective study. J Clin Neurosci 14:526–531

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kondageski C, Thompson D, Reynolds M, Hayward RD (2007) Experience with the Strata valve in the management of shunt overdrainage. J Neurosurg 106:95–102

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding source

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Highway, PO Box 33932, Shreveport, LA, 71103-33932, USA

    G. Kesava Reddy, Papireddy Bollam, Brian Willis, Bharat Guthikonda & Anil Nanda

  2. Department Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, USA

    Gloria Caldito

Authors
  1. G. Kesava Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Papireddy Bollam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gloria Caldito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Brian Willis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bharat Guthikonda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Anil Nanda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Kesava Reddy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reddy, G.K., Bollam, P., Caldito, G. et al. Ventriculoperitoneal shunt complications in hydrocephalus patients with intracranial tumors: an analysis of relevant risk factors. J Neurooncol 103, 333–342 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-010-0393-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-010-0393-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation