Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Endoscopic implantation and patency evaluation of lumboperitoneal shunt: an innovative technique

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The placement of the lumboperitoneal (LP) shunt tube used in the management of idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) and the evaluation of its patency necessitate an abdominal surgical incision. This procedure can now be done using a laparoscopic-assisted technique. This study was designed to evaluate the usefulness of this technique in treating patients with IIH in whom visual loss was progressive in spite of aggressive medical management, as well as for the evaluation of the function of the shunt tube after its placement. Methods: Seventeen patients aged between 21 and 45 years (mean, 31) were included in the study. They were divided into two groups. Laparoscopy was used in the first group of 11 patients for primary placement of the peritoneal portion of shunt catheter in the right subphrenic recess. It was used in the second group, which consisted of six patients who had recurrence of symptoms after surgical LP shunt placement, for the evaluation of shunt patency and position inside the peritoneal cavity and for the repositioning of the displaced shunt, as needed. Results: In the first group (n = 11), visual symptomatology was improved in 10 of 11 patients and became stable in the remaining one. In the second group (n = 6), two of six patients had a patent tube in a proper position; three had complete intraperitoneal migration of the shunt tubes, which were repositioned using a laparoscopic-assisted technique; and the last patient had occlusion of the peritoneal side of the shunt by omental adhesions that had been liberated by the laparoscopy. No complications related to laparoscopy were recorded in this series. Conclusion: This procedure was associated with better functional results, less postoperative pain and discomfort, a shorter hospital stay, an earlier return to normal activities, and cosmetic acceptability .

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. G Buess A Cuschieri (1992) Nature and scope of endoscopic surgery. A Cuschieri G Buess J Pèrissat (Eds) Operative manual of endoscopic surgery. Springer-Verlag New York 9–13

    Google Scholar 

  2. JJ Corbett PJ Savino HS Thompson et al. (1982) ArticleTitleVisual loss in pseudotumor cerebri. Arch Neurol 39 461–474 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:Bi2B2MngslU%3D Occurrence Handle7103794

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. MS Greenberg (1997) Idiopathic intracranial hypertension. MS Greenberg (Eds) Handbook of neurosurgery. Thieme . 325–328

    Google Scholar 

  4. HM Hassan (1971) ArticleTitleModified instrument method for laparoscopy. Am J Obst Gynecol 110 886–887

    Google Scholar 

  5. I Johnston A Paterson M Besser (1981) ArticleTitleThe treatment of benign intracranial hypertension: a review of 134 cases. Surg Neurol 16 218–223 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0090-3019(81)90010-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. SE Kelman RC Sergott GA Cioffi et al. (1991) ArticleTitleModified optic nerve sheath decompression in patients with functioning lumboperitoneal shunts and progressive visual loss. Ophthalmology 98 1449–1453 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By2D2M%2FmvFM%3D Occurrence Handle1945323

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. PA Paraskeva A Darzi (1994) Principles of minimal access surgery. RM Kirk (Eds) General surgical operations. Churchill Livingstone . 111–116

    Google Scholar 

  8. K Radhakrishnan JE Ahlskog JA Garrity et al. (1994) ArticleTitleIdiopathic intracranial hypertension. Mayo Clin Proc 69 169–180 Occurrence Handle8309269

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. WR Selman RF Spetzler CB Wilson et al. (1980) ArticleTitlePercutaneous lumboperitoneal shunt: review of 130 cases. Neurosurgery 6 253–257

    Google Scholar 

  10. FH Sklar (1996) Pseudotumor cerebri. RH Wilkins SS Rengachary (Eds) Neurosurgery. McGraw-Hill New York 357–361

    Google Scholar 

  11. PL Williams R Warwick M Dyson (1989) The peritoneum. PL Williams M Dyson (Eds) Gray’s anatomy. Churchill Livingstone . 1336–1347

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, 1 El Mokades El Kabary Street, 7th District, Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt

    S. A. Hay

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, 1, El Mokades El Kabary Street, 7th District, Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt

    A. A. Hay, H. Moharram & M. Salama

Authors
  1. S. A. Hay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. A. Hay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Moharram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Salama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. A. Hay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hay, S., Hay, A., Moharram, H. et al. Endoscopic implantation and patency evaluation of lumboperitoneal shunt: an innovative technique . Surg Endosc 18, 482–484 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9038-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-9038-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation