Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2017; 78(01): 030-036
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1584309
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Evaluation of Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt-Related Complications in Intracranial Meningioma with Hydrocephalus

Shyamal C. Bir
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
,
Shabal Sapkota
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
,
Tanmoy K. Maiti
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
,
Subhas Konar
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
,
Papireddy Bollam
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
,
Anil Nanda
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health-Shreveport, Shreveport, Louisiana, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

25 June 2014

19 April 2016

Publication Date:
02 June 2016 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Meningioma is a common intracranial tumor that predisposes patients to hydrocephalus which may require a permanent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion procedure such as ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts. We reviewed our long-term experience with VP shunts for the management of hydrocephalus in patients with meningioma.

Methods and Materials A total of 48 Patients with meningioma who underwent VP shunt insertion for hydrocephalus from 1990 to 2013 was included in our case series. The study population was evaluated clinically and radiographically after VP shunt placement.

Results Overall shunt failure was seen in 13 (27%) patients. Single and multiple shunt revisions were required in eight (16.7%) and five (10.4%) patients, respectively. The overall shunt revision within 6 months, 1 , and 5 years was 19, 23, and 27%, respectively. Male patient was significantly associated with the longer survival after shunt placement. Revisions free survival after 3, 5, 10, and 15 years of VP shunt placement were 70, 46, 30, and 20%, respectively. Finally, in regression analysis, age greater than 65 years (p = 0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.1–0.13), tumor in posterior fossa (p < 0.0001, 95% CI = 0.1–0.23), tumor size (> 5 cm) (p = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.01–0.19), and Simpson resection grades II to IV (p = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.07–0.2) were identified as positive predictors of requirement of CSF flow diversion

Conclusion The findings of the present study reveal that VP shunting is an important treatment option for the management of hydrocephalus in patients with meningioma. Further studies using less invasive techniques are warranted to compare the benefits of VP shunt for the management of hydrocephalus.

Keywords

hydrocephalus - meningioma - VP shunt - outcome - complications - predictive factors
 

  • References

  • 1 Riva-Cambrin J, Detsky AS, Lamberti-Pasculli M , et al. Predicting postresection hydrocephalus in pediatric patients with posterior fossa tumors. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2009; 3 (5) 378-385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bergsneider M, Miller C, Vespa PM, Hu X. Surgical management of adult hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 2008; 62 (Suppl. 02) 643-659 , discussion 659–660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Burkhardt JK, Zinn PO, Graenicher M , et al. Predicting postoperative hydrocephalus in 227 patients with skull base meningioma. Neurosurg Focus 2011; 30 (5) E9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Reddy GK, Bollam P, Caldito G, Willis B, Guthikonda B, Nanda A. Ventriculoperitoneal shunt complications in hydrocephalus patients with intracranial tumors: an analysis of relevant risk factors. J Neurooncol 2011; 103 (2) 333-342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Zhang J, Qu C, Wang Z , et al. Improved ventriculoatrial shunt for cerebrospinal fluid diversion after multiple ventriculoperitoneal shunt failures. Surg Neurol 2009; 72 (Suppl. 01) S29-S33 , discussion S33–S34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Reddy GK, Shi R, Nanda A, Guthikonda B. Obstructive hydrocephalus in adult patients: the Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport experience with ventriculoperitoneal shunts. World Neurosurg 2011; 76 (1–2): 176-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Wu Y, Green NL, Wrensch MR, Zhao S, Gupta N. Ventriculoperitoneal shunt complications in California: 1990 to 2000. Neurosurgery 2007; 61 (3) 557-562 , discussion 562–563
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Stein SC, Guo W. Have we made progress in preventing shunt failure? A critical analysis. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2008; 1 (1) 40-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ringel F, Schramm J, Meyer B. Comparison of programmable shunt valves vs standard valves for communicating hydrocephalus of adults: a retrospective analysis of 407 patients. Surg Neurol 2005; 63 (1) 36-41 , discussion 41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Lund-Johansen M, Svendsen F, Wester K. Shunt failures and complications in adults as related to shunt type, diagnosis, and the experience of the surgeon. Neurosurgery 1994; 35 (5) 839-844 , discussion 844
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lam CH, Villemure JG. Comparison between ventriculoatrial and ventriculoperitoneal shunting in the adult population. Br J Neurosurg 1997; 11 (1) 43-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hoh BL, Lang SS, Ortiz MV, Chi YY, Lewis SB, Pincus DW. Lower incidence of reoperation with longer shunt survival with adult ventriculoperitoneal shunts placed for hemorrhage-related hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 2008; 63 (1) 70-74 , discussion 74–75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Farahmand D, Hilmarsson H, Högfeldt M, Tisell M. Perioperative risk factors for short term shunt revisions in adult hydrocephalus patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009; 80 (11) 1248-1253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Khan F, Rehman A, Shamim MS, Bari ME. Factors affecting ventriculoperitoneal shunt survival in adult patients. Surg Neurol Int 2015; 6: 25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ambekar S, Dwarakanath S, Chandramouli BA, Sampath S, Devi BI, Pandey P. Does CSF composition predict shunt malfunction in tuberculous meningitis?. Indian J Tuberc 2011; 58 (2) 77-81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Adegbite AB, Khan M. Role of protein content in CSF ascites following ventriculoperitoneal shunting. Case report. J Neurosurg 1982; 57 (3) 423-425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Salmon JH. A ventriculo-peritoneal shunt for hemorrhagic or high protein fluid. Surg Neurol 1977; 8 (1) 69-70
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Schachter P, Findler G. Continuous spinal drainage of high viscosity C.S.F. using IVAC system—technical note. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1987; 84 (1–2) 71-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Yount RA, Glazier MC, Mealey Jr J, Kalsbeck JE. Cerebrospinal fluid ascites complicating ventriculoperitoneal shunting. Report of four cases. J Neurosurg 1984; 61 (1) 180-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Fulkerson DH, Vachhrajani S, Bohnstedt BN , et al. Analysis of the risk of shunt failure or infection related to cerebrospinal fluid cell count, protein level, and glucose levels in low-birth-weight premature infants with posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2011; 7 (2) 147-151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Brydon HL, Keir G, Thompson EJ, Bayston R, Hayward R, Harkness W. Protein adsorption to hydrocephalus shunt catheters: CSF protein adsorption. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 64 (5) 643-647
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Rammos S, Klopfenstein J, Augspurger L , et al. Conversion of external ventricular drains to ventriculoperitoneal shunts after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: effects of site and protein/red blood cell counts on shunt infection and malfunction. J Neurosurg 2008; 109 (6) 1001-1004
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brydon HL, Hayward R, Harkness W, Bayston R. Does the cerebrospinal fluid protein concentration increase the risk of shunt complications?. Br J Neurosurg 1996; 10 (3) 267-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Brydon HL, Bayston R, Hayward R, Harkness W. The effect of protein and blood cells on the flow-pressure characteristics of shunts. Neurosurgery 1996; 38 (3) 498-504 , discussion 505
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Brydon HL, Hayward R, Harkness W, Bayston R. Physical properties of cerebrospinal fluid of relevance to shunt function. 1: The effect of protein upon CSF viscosity. Br J Neurosurg 1995; 9 (5) 639-644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Brydon HL, Bayston R, Hayward R, Harkness W. Reduced bacterial adhesion to hydrocephalus shunt catheters mediated by cerebrospinal fluid proteins. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996; 60 (6) 671-675
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sainte-Rose C, Piatt JH, Renier D , et al. Mechanical complications in shunts. Pediatr Neurosurg 1991; -1992 17 (1) 2-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wilson TJ, Stetler Jr WR, Al-Holou WN, Sullivan SE. Comparison of the accuracy of ventricular catheter placement using freehand placement, ultrasonic guidance, and stereotactic neuronavigation. J Neurosurg 2013; 119 (1) 66-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dorward NL, Alberti O, Velani B , et al. Postimaging brain distortion: magnitude, correlates, and impact on neuronavigation. J Neurosurg 1998; 88 (4) 656-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Nanda A, Ambekar S. Expanding the realms of navigation in neurosurgery. World Neurosurg 2014; 82 (1–2): e187-e188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Esposito F, Di Rocco F, Zada G , et al. Intraventricular and skull base neuroendoscopy in 2012: a global survey of usage patterns and the role of intraoperative neuronavigation. World Neurosurg 2013; 80 (6) 709-716
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Gangemi M, Mascari C, Maiuri F, Godano U, Donati P, Longatti PL. Long-term outcome of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in obstructive hydrocephalus. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2007; 50 (5) 265-269
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Grunert P, Charalampaki P, Hopf N, Filippi R. The role of third ventriculostomy in the management of obstructive hydrocephalus. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2003; 46 (1) 16-21
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Di Vincenzo J, Keiner D, Gaab MR, Schroeder HW, Oertel JM. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy: preoperative considerations and intraoperative strategy based on 300 procedures. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2014; 75 (1) 20-30
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Grand W, Leonardo J, Chamczuk AJ, Korus AJ. Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy in 250 Adults With Hydrocephalus: Patient Selection, Outcomes, and Complications. Neurosurgery 2016; 78 (1) 109-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Amini A, Schmidt RH. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy in a series of 36 adult patients. Neurosurg Focus 2005; 19 (6) E9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Dusick JR, McArthur DL, Bergsneider M. Success and complication rates of endoscopic third ventriculostomy for adult hydrocephalus: a series of 108 patients. Surg Neurol 2008; 69 (1) 5-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Jenkinson MD, Hayhurst C, Al-Jumaily M, Kandasamy J, Clark S, Mallucci CL. The role of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in adult patients with hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 2009; 110 (5) 861-866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Tamburrini G, Pettorini BL, Massimi L, Caldarelli M, Di Rocco C. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy: the best option in the treatment of persistent hydrocephalus after posterior cranial fossa tumour removal?. Childs Nerv Syst 2008; 24 (12) 1405-1412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Boon AJ, Tans JT, Delwel EJ , et al. Dutch Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus Study: randomized comparison of low- and medium-pressure shunts. J Neurosurg 1998; 88 (3) 490-495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Notarianni C, Vannemreddy P, Caldito G , et al. Congenital hydrocephalus and ventriculoperitoneal shunts: influence of etiology and programmable shunts on revisions. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2009; 4 (6) 547-552
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 McGirt MJ, Buck II DW, Sciubba D , et al. Adjustable vs set-pressure valves decrease the risk of proximal shunt obstruction in the treatment of pediatric hydrocephalus. Childs Nerv Syst 2007; 23 (3) 289-295
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Inoue T, Kuzu Y, Ogasawara K, Ogawa A. Effect of 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging on various pressure programmable shunt valves. J Neurosurg 2005; 103 (2, Suppl): 163-165
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Akbar M, Aschoff A, Georgi JC , et al. Adjustable cerebrospinal fluid shunt valves in 3.0-Tesla MRI: a phantom study using explanted devices. Rofo 2010; 182 (7) 594-602
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Mangano FT, Menendez JA, Habrock T , et al. Early programmable valve malfunctions in pediatric hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 2005; 103 (6, Suppl): 501-507
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Javalkar V, Banerjee AD, Nanda A. Posterior cranial fossa meningiomas. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2012; 73 (1) 1-10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Pattavilakom A, Xenos C, Bradfield O, Danks RA. Reduction in shunt infection using antibiotic impregnated CSF shunt catheters: an Australian prospective study. J Clin Neurosci 2007; 14 (6) 526-531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Kondageski C, Thompson D, Reynolds M, Hayward RD. Experience with the Strata valve in the management of shunt overdrainage. J Neurosurg 2007; 106 (2, Suppl): 95-102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar