ArticleChild's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery2025
Endoscopic third ventriculostomy versus ventriculoperitoneal shunting for hydrocephalus treatment following prenatal and postnatal myelomeningocele repair.
Article in Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIt is not known how responses to endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and ventriculoperitoneal shunting (VPS) for myelomeningocele (MMC)-associated hydrocephalus vary with timing of MMC repair. Therefore, we compare the use of ETV and VPS after prenatal and postnatal MMC repair.
methodsWe retrospectively identified MMC patients who underwent prenatal or postnatal repair and VPS or ETV ± choroid plexus cauterization (CPC) between 2015 and 2024 at Washington University in St. Louis. Need for shunt or ETV revision (defined as surgical revision of shunt or ETV) and differences in preoperative and postoperative head circumference and imaging measures were examined.
resultsOne hundred two patients (41% prenatal, 59% postnatal repair) were initially identified. Fourteen (33%) of those repaired prenatally (36% ETV ± CPC vs 64% VPS) and 39 (65%) of those repaired postnatally (10% ETV ± CPC vs 90% VPS) required CSF diversion. After prenatal repair, revision was required in 40% following ETV ± CPC versus 11% following VPS (∆29%; 95% CI - 19%, 77%; p = 0.207). After postnatal repair, revision rates were similar (p = 0.923). ETV ± CPC was associated with shorter survival until revision (prenatal repair, 12.9 months, 95% CI 1.4-24.5; postnatal repair, 29.1 months, 95% CI 13.2-44.9) compared to VPS (prenatal repair, 49.4 months, 95% CI 30.9-68.0; postnatal repair, 48.0 months, 95% CI 40.8-55.2).
conclusionThose treated with ETV have less time to failure than those treated with VPS regardless of timing of MMC repair. A clinically meaningful increase in need for revision after ETV ± CPC versus VPS after prenatal repair cannot be excluded. This may have implications for hydrocephalus treatment and follow-up in children with MMC, meriting further study in a larger, multicenter cohort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41081930What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.