Effectiveness and safety of ventriculoperitoneal shunt versus lumboperitoneal shunt for communicating hydrocephalus: A systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

被引:16
|
作者
Ho, Yi-Jen [1 ]
Chiang, Wen-Chun [2 ]
Huang, Hsin-Yi [3 ]
Lin, Shinn-Zong [1 ,4 ]
Tsai, Sheng-Tzung [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Hualien Tzu Chi Hosp, Buddhist Tzu Chi Med Fdn, Dept Neurosurg, Hualien, Taiwan
[2] Hualien Tzu Chi Hosp, Buddhist Tzu Chi Med Fdn, Dept Chest Med, Hualien, Taiwan
[3] Hualien Tzu Chi Hosp, Buddhist Tzu Chi Med Fdn, Dept Med Res, Hualien, Taiwan
[4] Tzu Chi Univ, Sch Med, Hualien, Taiwan
[5] Hualien Tzu Chi Hosp, Buddhist Tzu Chi Med Fdn, Dept Neurosurg, 707 Sec 3 Zhongyang Rd, Hualien 970473, Taiwan
关键词
communicating hydrocephalus; lumboperitoneal shunt; meta-analysis; ventriculoperitoneal shunt; NORMAL-PRESSURE HYDROCEPHALUS; COMPLICATIONS; MANAGEMENT; ESTIMATORS; PERITONEAL; VARIANCE; EFFICACY; BIAS;
D O I
10.1111/cns.14086
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
IntroductionThe current standard surgical treatment for cerebrospinal fluid diversion is a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) implantation. Lumboperitoneal shunts (LPS) are an alternative treatment for communicating hydrocephalus. Prior studies comparing these two included a limited number of participants. MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis determined the treatment failure, complications and effectiveness of lumboperitoneal shunt for communicating hydrocephalus. We reviewed studies with clinical and imaging diagnoses of communicating hydrocephalus, all causes and subtypes of communicating hydrocephalus, and studies that analyzed the primary and secondary outcomes listed below. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and retrospective studies. We performed the meta-analysis in R, using a random-effects model and reporting 95% confidence intervals. ResultsData from 25 studies, including 3654 patients, were analyzed. The total complication rates were 12.98% (188/1448) for lumboperitoneal shunt and 23.80% (398/1672) for ventriculoperitoneal shunt. The odds ratio for lumboperitoneal shunt versus ventriculoperitoneal shunt complication rates was 0.29 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.45, p < 0.0001), and the I-2 was 72%. The shunt obstruction/malfunction rate was 3.99% (48/1204) for lumboperitoneal shunt and 8.31% (115/1384) for ventriculoperitoneal shunt (Odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.79, p = 0.002, I-2 = 0%). Based on the Modified Rankin Scale score, there were no differences in effectiveness between lumboperitoneal shunt and ventriculoperitoneal shunt. Nevertheless, lumboperitoneal shunt improved radiological outcomes. ConclusionsThis analysis demonstrated that lumboperitoneal shunt is a safe and equally effective choice for treating communicating hydrocephalus. More studies are needed to confirm the safety of lumboperitoneal shunt.
引用
收藏
页码:804 / 815
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Ventriculoperitoneal shunt insertion for hydrocephalus in human immunodeficiency virus-infected adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
    James J. M. Loan
    Ncedile Mankahla
    Graeme Meintjes
    A. Graham Fieggen
    Systematic Reviews, 6
  • [22] Comparative analysis of the lumboperitoneal shunt versus ventriculoperitoneal shunt for leptomeningeal metastasis-associated hydrocephalus in non-small cell lung cancer
    Kim, Minjoon
    Lee, Chaejin
    Yoon, Sang-Youl
    Park, Seong-Hyun
    Hwang, Jeong-Hyun
    Kang, Kyunghun
    Park, Eunhee
    Choi, Sunha
    Lee, Shin Yup
    Yoo, Seung Soo
    Chae, Yee Soo
    Park, Ki-Su
    ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2025, 167 (01)
  • [23] Endoscopic third ventriculostomy compared to ventriculoperitoneal shunt as treatment for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Greuter, Ladina
    Schenker, Timo
    Guzman, Raphael
    Soleman, Jehuda
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2024, 38 (06) : 1276 - 1282
  • [24] Outcomes of endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) in the treatment of paediatric hydrocephalus: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Katarzyna Julia Minta
    Siddarth Kannan
    Chandrasekaran Kaliaperumal
    Child's Nervous System, 2024, 40 : 1045 - 1052
  • [25] Outcomes of endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) in the treatment of paediatric hydrocephalus: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Minta, Katarzyna Julia
    Kannan, Siddarth
    Kaliaperumal, Chandrasekaran
    CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM, 2023, 40 (4) : 1045 - 1052
  • [26] Efficacy and safety of programmable shunt valves for hydrocephalus: A meta-analysis
    Li, Min
    Wang, Han
    Ouyang, Yetong
    Yin, Min
    Yin, Xiaoping
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 44 : 139 - 146
  • [27] Cranioplasty Infection and Resorption Are Associated with the Presence of a Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Mustroph, Christian M.
    Malcolm, James G.
    Rindler, Rima S.
    Chu, Jason K.
    Grossberg, Jonathan A.
    Pradilla, Gustavo
    Ahmad, Faiz U.
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 103 : 686 - 693
  • [28] Surgical Management of Non-Communicating Hydrocephalus in Patients: Meta-Analysis and Comparison of Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy and Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt
    Cheng, HongWei
    Hong, WenMing
    Mei, ZhaoJun
    Wang, XiaoJie
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2015, 26 (02) : 481 - 486
  • [29] Comparison of ventriculoperitoneal shunt to lumboperitoneal shunt in the treatment of posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus A prospective, monocentric, non-randomized controlled trial
    Sun, Tong
    You, Chao
    Ma, Lu
    Yuan, Yikai
    Yang, Jingguo
    Tian, Meng
    Zhou, Yicheng
    Guan, Junwen
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (27) : E20528
  • [30] Ventriculoatrial shunt remains a safe surgical alternative for hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bue, Enrico Lo
    Morello, Alberto
    Bellomo, Jacopo
    Bradaschia, Leonardo
    Lacatena, Filippo
    Colonna, Stefano
    Fiumefreddo, Alessandro
    Stieglitz, Lennart
    Regli, Luca
    Lanotte, Michele Maria
    Garbossa, Diego
    Cofano, Fabio
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01):