Pediatric Shunt Revision Analysis Within the First Year of Shunt Placement : A Single Center Experience

• Main Authors: Muhammad Azzam, -, Roidah Taqiyya Zahra Wathoni, -, Wihasto Suryaningtyas, -, Muhammad Arifin Parenrengi, -
• Format: Article PeerReviewed
• Language: English; Indonesian; English
• Published: 2021
• Subjects: R5-920 Medicine (General)
• Online Access: https://repository.unair.ac.id/124332/1/5.%20%20Jurnal%20Pediatric%20%20Shunt.pdf; https://repository.unair.ac.id/124332/2/5.%20Karil%20Bidang%20Ilmu%20%28Paeditric%20Shunt%29.pdf; https://repository.unair.ac.id/124332/3/5.%20Pediatric%20shunt%20revision%20analysis%20within%20the%20first%20year%20of%20shunt%20placement%20a%20single%20center%20experience.pdf; https://repository.unair.ac.id/124332/
• Institution: Universitas Airlangga

Abstract Background: Hydrocephalus is a common problem in neurosurgery with shunt placement remains the mainstay of the management. However, shunt placement generally requires following surgical procedures, including shunt revision. Despite the recent developments, the incidence of shunt failure remains high, approximately 30-51% in the 1st year following the shunt placement. Methods: An observational retrospective study of pediatric neurosurgery patients whom underwent CSF shunting procedure, both primary and repeated VPS, VAS, CPS, and subdural-peritoneal shunt procedures between January 2018 and May 2019. The patients were observed for 12 months for potential complication requiring shunt revision following the shunt placement. Results: A total of 142 patients underwent shunt placement. The shunt revision within 12 months was found in 26 patients (18.3%), 25 cases were VPS (96.2%) and one case was CPS (3.8%). The mean period of time between shunt placement to shunt revision was 3.96 months. Age of under 6 months old during the shunt placement showed significantly higher risk for shunt revision (RR 2.32 CI 1.13-4.74, P = 0.018). The most common diagnosis requiring shunt revision was congenital anomaly (16 cases, 61.5%). The most common cause of revision was shunt malfunction, with 21 cases (80.8%) followed by infected shunt with 5 cases (19.2%). Conclusion: The 1st year observation showed relatively high rate for shunt revision. The patient underwent shunt procedure should be regularly followed up in long period for better evaluation of the outcome. The application of shunt registry in some countries appears to be efficient and beneficial for sustainable follow-up in patients underwent shunt placement.