1014 Predictors of Shunt Revision in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus

INTRODUCTION: While ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) placement is increasingly considered standard of care for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH), many patients may require revision. This study aimed to identify independent predictors of shunt revision following VPS for iNPH. METHODS: All patient treated with shunting iNPH at a tertiary care center between January 2000 and January 2023 were retrospectively reviewed, and independent predictors of shunt revision were identified utilizing multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 574 total patients, 88 (15.3%) underwent revision (). Comparison between revised and non-revised patients disclosed associations of revision with age (73.2 ± 6.4 vs 75.0 ± 6.2 years; p = 0.02), prior shunt placement (2.3% vs 0.0%; p = 0.02), shunt type (ventriculoperitoneal: 94.3% vs 98.8%; ventriculoatrial: 5.7% vs 1.2%; p = 0.02), valve type (fixed: 63.6% vs 37.2%; programmable: 36.4% vs 62.8%; p < 0.01), distal catheter placement technique (open surgery: 71.1% vs 50.8%; laparoscopy: 28.9% vs 49.2%; p < 0.01), and proximal catheter placement approach (frontal: 61.4% vs 41.8%; occipital approach: 38.6% vs 58.2%, p < 0.01). Multivariable logistic regression showed that shunt revision was associated with younger age (OR=1.04/yr; p=0.02), ventriculopleural/ventriculoatrial placement (OR=4.48 [vs VPS]; p=0.02), fixed setting valve (OR=2.85 [versus adjustable]; p<0.01), open approach for distal catheter placement (OR=2.33 [versus laparoscopic]; p<0.01), frontal proximal catheter (OR=2.16 [versus parietal]; p<0.01), and ). Similar results were noted when analyzing predictors of revision amongst only patients who required surgical revision for reasons other than infection. CONCLUSIONS: Shunt revision amongst iNPH patients is associated with factors relating to surgical technique. Shunt revision rates appear lower amongst patients with VPS using an occipital proximal catheter with an adjustable valve and laparoscopic distal catheter placement.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Neurosurgery
Published
2025-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003360_1014
Primary Topic
Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

1014 Predictors of Shunt Revision in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus

Benjamin D. Elder, Rahul Kumar, Maria Astudillo Potes, Zach Pennington et al.
Neurosurgery
Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
article

1014 Predictors of Shunt Revision in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus

Benjamin D. Elder, Rahul Kumar, Maria Astudillo Potes, Zach Pennington, Jeremy K. Cutsforth‐Gregory, Petrice Cogswell, David Thomas Jones, Ignacio Jusué-Torres, Jonathan Graff-Radford, Abdelrahman M. Hamouda, R. Antelo Lorenzo
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: While ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) placement is increasingly considered standard of care for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH), many patients may require revision. This study aimed to identify independent predictors of shunt revision following VPS for iNPH. METHODS: All patient treated with shunting iNPH at a tertiary care center between January 2000 and January 2023 were retrospectively reviewed, and independent predictors of shunt revision were identified utilizing multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 574 total patients, 88 (15.3%) underwent revision (). Comparison between revised and non-revised patients disclosed associations of revision with age (73.2 ± 6.4 vs 75.0 ± 6.2 years; p = 0.02), prior shunt placement (2.3% vs 0.0%; p = 0.02), shunt type (ventriculoperitoneal: 94.3% vs 98.8%; ventriculoatrial: 5.7% vs 1.2%; p = 0.02), valve type (fixed: 63.6% vs 37.2%; programmable: 36.4% vs 62.8%; p < 0.01), distal catheter placement technique (open surgery: 71.1% vs 50.8%; laparoscopy: 28.9% vs 49.2%; p < 0.01), and proximal catheter placement approach (frontal: 61.4% vs 41.8%; occipital approach: 38.6% vs 58.2%, p < 0.01). Multivariable logistic regression showed that shunt revision was associated with younger age (OR=1.04/yr; p=0.02), ventriculopleural/ventriculoatrial placement (OR=4.48 [vs VPS]; p=0.02), fixed setting valve (OR=2.85 [versus adjustable]; p<0.01), open approach for distal catheter placement (OR=2.33 [versus laparoscopic]; p<0.01), frontal proximal catheter (OR=2.16 [versus parietal]; p<0.01), and ). Similar results were noted when analyzing predictors of revision amongst only patients who required surgical revision for reasons other than infection. CONCLUSIONS: Shunt revision amongst iNPH patients is associated with factors relating to surgical technique. Shunt revision rates appear lower amongst patients with VPS using an occipital proximal catheter with an adjustable valve and laparoscopic distal catheter placement.

NeurosurgeryVol. 71(Supplement_1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.