PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15062402

Selecting patients for endoscopic third ventriculostomy.

Abstract

ETV using contemporary instrumentation has been used for more than 50 years, but its use has become widespread only in the last 10 to 15 years. Randomized prospective trials comparing ETV with shunts are needed before definitive statements can be made about the role of the former in managing the many forms of hydrocephalus. The absolute and relative contraindications for the use of ETV in the management of hydrocephalus are shown in the Box 1 on this page. It is important not to presume that a specific radiographic or clinical feature would prevent a patient from responding to this rather new procedure without testing the hypothesis. Patients should be given as much information as possible regarding the risks and benefits of ETV so they can participate in the decision-making process. When should the role of ETV in the management of hydrocephalus be discussed with a patient? At the initial diagnosis of hydrocephalus, the patient or family should be informed of this potential alternative to shunting for the management of hydrocephalus. I also believe that patients with working shunts who are being followed chronically should be informed about ETV as a potential treatment option when their shunt fails. Every shunt failure or infection should be viewed as an opportunity to explore the possibility that the patient could become shunt independent.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Harold L Rekate. 2004. Selecting patients for endoscopic third ventriculostomy.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1042-3680(03)00074-3

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparison of intracranial pressure measured simultaneously within the brain parenchyma and cerebral ventricles.

We report a 48-year-old man treated for acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) wherein intracranial pressure (ICP) was measured simultaneously within the ventricular cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and the brain parenchyma (PAR). Single pressure waves within the continuous pressure signal were identified with determination of the single wave parameters pulse amplitude (i.e. pressure difference between diastolic minimum pressure and systolic maximum pressure), mean pressure (i.e. mean pressure from beginning to ending minimum diastolic minimum pressure), and latency (i.e. rise time from diastolic minimum pressure to systolic maximum pressure). A total of 218,589 CSF/PAR single pressure wave pairs were analyzed. For these CSF/PAR wave pairs the mean difference in pulse pressure amplitude was -0.13 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.13 to -0.12 mmHg], mean difference in mean single wave pressure -0.71 mmHg (95% CI -0.74 to -0.68 mmHg), and mean difference in latency -0.01 seconds (95% CI -0.01 to -0.01 seconds). Hence, in this patient monitoring ICP within the ventricular CSF or brain parenchyma gave similar results. Moreover, the comparisons of single CSF/PAR wave pulse pressure amplitudes gave no evidence of a pressure gradient from brain parenchyma to the ventricular CSF in this patient.

Cerebral Ventricles↗

Periventricular nodular heterotopia and Williams syndrome.

We report here on the first case of a child with bilateral periventricular nodular heterotopia (PNH) and Williams syndrome. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses demonstrated a deletion of the elastin gene in the Williams syndrome critical region (WSCR). Further mapping by loss of heterozygosity analysis both by microsatellite marker and SNP profiling demonstrated a 1.5 Mb deletion beyond the telomeric end of the typical WSCR. No mutations were identified in the X-linked filamin-A gene (the most common cause of PNH). These findings suggest another dominant PNH disorder along chromosome 7q11.23.

Cerebral Ventricles↗