Minimal-access technique for distal catheter insertion during ventricular peritoneal shunt procedures: a review of 100 cases

Laparoscopy versus mini-laparotomy peritoneal catheter insertion of ventriculoperitoneal shunts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt treatment is the main treatment method for hydrocephalus. The traditional operative approach for peritoneal catheter insertion is mini-laparotomy. In recent years, laparoscopy-assisted insertion has become increasingly popular. It seems likely that use of an endoscope could lower the incidence of shunt malfunction. However, there is no consensus about the benefits of laparoscopy-assisted peritoneal catheter insertion.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases. A manual search for reference lists was conducted. The protocol was prepared according to the interventional systematic reviews of the Cochrane Handbook, and the article was written on the basis of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines.

RESULTS

Eleven observational trials and 2 randomized controlled trials were included. Seven operation-related outcome measures were analyzed, and 3 of these showed no difference between operative techniques. The results of the meta-analysis are as follows: in the laparoscopy group, the rate of distal shunt failure was lower (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25–0.67; p = 0.0003), the absolute effect is 7.11% for distal shunt failure, the number needed to treat is 14 (95% CI 8–23), operative time was shorter (mean difference [MD], −12.84; 95% CI −20.68 to −5.00; p = 0.001), and blood loss was less (MD −9.93, 95% CI −17.56 to −2.31; p = 0.01). In addition, a borderline statistically significant difference tending to laparoscopic technique was observed in terms of hospital stay (MD −1.77, 95% CI −3.67 to 0.13; p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

To some extent, a laparoscopic insertion technique could yield a better prognosis, mainly because it is associated with a lower distal failure rate and shorter operative time, which would be clinically relevant.

Laparoscopic-assisted Peritoneal Shunt Insertion for Ventriculoperitoneal and Lumboperitoneal Shunt Placement: An Institutional Experience of 53 Consecutive Cases

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe operative times, complication rates, and outcomes following laparoscopic placement of the peritoneal catheter in ventriculoperitoneal (VP) and lumboperitoneal (LP) shunt insertion.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of those who underwent laparoscopic-assisted VP or LP shunt insertion from July 2007 to August 2011.

RESULTS

The study included 53 consecutive patients (35 women and 18 men). Mean age was 51 years (range, 16 to 83 y), mean BMI was 27.6 (range, 16 to 54), and 35.8% of the patients had previous abdominal surgery. Mean operative time for VP shunt placement was 68.2 ± 19.0 minutes, and for LP shunt placement 84 ± 12.4 minutes. There were no intraoperative complications, and conversion to minilaparotomy was 0%. There were 2 distal catheter-associated complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic-assisted VP/LP shunt placement is associated with a low incidence of distal catheter malfunction. Direct visualization of shunt placement into the peritoneal cavity is a major advantage making it a viable alternative over traditional techniques.

Laparoscopic versus open insertion of the peritoneal catheter in ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement: review of 810 consecutive cases

Object

Traditional ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt surgery involves insertion of the distal catheter by minilaparotomy. However, minilaparotomy may be a significant source of morbidity during shunt surgery. Laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter is an alternative technique that may simplify and improve the safety of shunt surgery.

Methods

The authors performed a retrospective review of hospital records of all patients undergoing new VP shunt insertion at a tertiary care center between 2004 and 2009. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing open or laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter. Independent variables in the analysis included age, sex, race, body mass index, surgical technique, previous VP shunt placement, previous abdominal procedures, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, and indication for shunt placement. Dependent variables included the occurrence of shunt failure, cause of shunt failure, complications, length of stay (LOS), LOS after shunt placement, estimated blood loss, and operative time.

Results

The authors identified 810 patients who met the inclusion criteria; open or laparoscopic distal catheter insertion was performed in 335 and 475 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding age, race, ASA score, or indication for shunt placement. The most common indication was hydrocephalus due to subarachnoid hemorrhage, followed by tumor-associated hydrocephalus, normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH), and hydrocephalus due to trauma. The incidence of shunt failure was not statistically different between cohorts, occurring in 20.0% of laparoscopic and 20.9% of open catheter placement cases (p = 0.791). With analysis of causes of shunt failure, shunt obstruction occurred significantly more often in the open surgery cohort (p = 0.012). In patients with a known cause shunt obstruction, distal obstruction occurred in 35.7% of the open cohort obstructions and 4.8% of the laparoscopic cohort obstructions (p = 0.014). The relative risk of distal obstruction in open cases compared with laparoscopic cases was 7.50. Infections occurred in 8.2% of laparoscopic cases compared with 6.6% of open cases (p = 0.419). Within the NPH subgroup, the laparoscopically treated patients had significantly more overdrainage (p = 0.040), whereas those in the open cohort experienced significantly more shunt obstructions (p = 0.034). Laparoscopically treated patients had shorter operative times (p < 0.0005), inpatient LOS (p < 0.001), and inpatient LOS after VP shunt placement (p = 0.01) as well as less blood loss (p = 0.058).

Conclusions

To our knowledge this is the largest reported comparison of distal VP shunt catheter insertion techniques. Compared with minilaparotomy, the laparoscopic approach was associated with decreased time in the operating room and a decreased LOS. Moreover, laparoscopy was associated with fewer distal shunt obstructions. Laparoscopic shunt surgery is a viable alternative to traditional shunt surgery.

Laparoscopy-assisted ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery: personal experience and review of the literature

Ventriculoperitoneal shunting is a widely accepted technique for the treatment of hydrocephalus. The standard procedure to insert the peritoneal catheter requires an abdominal incision, muscle dissection, and opening of the peritoneum. A number of complications related to the abdominal surgical phase have been reported. Laparoscopy-assisted ventriculoperitoneal shunting is a valid alternative procedure that reduces surgical trauma. We describe our experience and review the literature. A total of 30 laparoscopically guided ventriculoperitoneal shunting procedures were performed between January 2007 and June 2008, in collaboration with a general surgeon experienced in laparoscopy. Of these procedures, 25 were new shunt placements and 5 were revisions. Data about operative time, outcome, and complications were registered and compared with a group of 30 patients treated by means of standard laparotomy in the period 2005-2007. Laparoscopic shunt placement was successful in all patients. Operative duration, complications, and postoperative pain were all lower in patients treated by laparoscopy as compared to the laparotomy. In the laparoscopic group, an earlier peristalsis, quicker mobilization, and better cosmetic results were also noted. Laparoscopy in both ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement and revision is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive technique. It ensures proper abdominal placement of the distal catheter under direct vision allowing confirmation of its patency.

Laparotomy versus Laparoscopic Placement of Distal Catheter in Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Procedure

OBJECTIVE

Traditionally, peritoneal catheter is inserted with midline laparotomy incision in ventriculoperitoneal (V-P) shunt procedures. Complications of V-P shunt is not uncommon and have been reported to occur in 5-37% of cases. The aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes and the operation time between laparotomy and laparoscopic groups.

METHODS

A total of 155 V-P shunt procedures were performed to treat hydrocephalic patients of various origins in our institute between June 2006 to January 2010; 95 of which were laparoscopically guided and 65 were not. We reviewed the operation time, surgery-related complications, and intraoperative and postoperative problems.

RESULTS

In the laparoscopy group, the mean duration of the procedure (52 minutes) was significantly shorter (p < 0.001) than the laparotomy group (109 minutes). There were two cases of malfunctions and one incidence of diaphragm injury in the laparotomy group. In contrast, there were neither malfunction nor any internal organ injuries in the laparoscopy group (p = 0.034). There were total of two cases of infections from both groups (p = 0.7).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopically guided insertions of distal shunt catheter is considered a fast and safe method in contrast to the laparotomy technique. This method allows the exact localization of the peritoneal catheter and a confirmation of its patency.