Abstract

Myelomeningocele (MMC), the most severe form of spina bifida, is characterized by protrusion of the meninges and spinal cord through a defect in the vertebral arches. The management and prevention of MMC-associated hydrocephalus has evolved since its initial introduction with regard to treatment of MMC defect, MMC-associated hydrocephalus treatment modality, and timing of hydrocephalus treatment. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from the years 1998-2014 was reviewed and neonates with spina bifida and hydrocephalus status were identified. Timing of hydrocephalus treatment, delayed treatment (DT) versus simultaneous MMC repair with hydrocephalus treatment (ST), and treatment modality (ETV vs ventriculoperitoneal shunt [VPS]) were analyzed. Yearly trends were assessed with univariable logarithmic regression. Multivariable logistic regression identified correlates of inpatient shunt failure. A PRISMA systematic literature review was conducted that analyzed data from studies that investigated 1) MMC closure technique and hydrocephalus rate, 2) hydrocephalus treatment modality, and 3) timing of hydrocephalus treatment. A weighted total of 10,627 inpatient MMC repairs were documented in the NIS, 8233 (77.5%) of which had documented hydrocephalus: 5876 (71.4%) were treated with VPS, 331 (4.0%) were treated with ETV, and 2026 (24.6%) remained untreated on initial inpatient stay. Treatment modality rates were stable over time; however, hydrocephalic patients in later years were less likely to receive hydrocephalus treatment during initial inpatient stay (odds ratio [OR] 0.974, p = 0.0331). The inpatient hydrocephalus treatment failure rate was higher for patients who received ETV treatment (17.5% ETV failure rate vs 7.9% VPS failure rate; p = 0.0028). Delayed hydrocephalus treatment was more prevalent in the later time period (77.9% vs 69.5%, p = 0.0287). Predictors of inpatient shunt failure included length of stay, shunt infection, jaundice, and delayed treatment. A longer time between operations increased the likelihood of inpatient shunt failure (OR 1.10, p < 0.0001). However, a meta-analysis of hydrocephalus timing studies revealed no difference between ST and DT with respect to shunt failure or infection rates. From 1998 to 2014, hydrocephalus treatment has become more delayed and the number of hydrocephalic MMC patients not treated on initial inpatient stay has increased. Meta-analysis demonstrated that shunt malfunction and infection rates do not differ between delayed and simultaneous hydrocephalus treatment.

Highlights

  • Delayed hydrocephalus treatment was more prevalent in the later time period (77.9% vs 69.5%, p = 0.0287)

  • From 1998 to 2014, hydrocephalus treatment has become more delayed and the number of hydrocephalic MMC patients not treated on initial inpatient stay has increased

  • Meta-analysis demonstrated that shunt malfunction and infection rates do not differ between delayed and simultaneous hydrocephalus treatment

Read more

Summary

Methods

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from the years 1998–2014 was reviewed and neonates with spina bifida and hydrocephalus status were identified. Timing of hydrocephalus treatment, delayed treatment (DT) versus simultaneous MMC repair with hydrocephalus treatment (ST), and treatment modality (ETV vs ventriculoperitoneal shunt [VPS]) were analyzed. Patients less than 28 days old with spina bifida (ICD-9 code 741.xx) and repair of spinal meningocele procedure (ICD-9 codes 035.1, 035.9) were identified. Patients with ICD-9 codes of spina bifida without hydrocephalus and concomitant codes of hydrocephalus (ICD-9 331.3, 331.4) or hydrocephalus treatment (ventriculoperitoneal shunt [VPS] ICD-9 02.3x; ETV ICD-9 0.22, 0.222) were considered to have hydrocephalus. Additional ICD-9 coding was utilized to identify common neonatal disease processes such as respiratory distress syndrome, wound infection, hematological disorders, necrotizing enterocolitis, bradycardia, tachycardia, jaundice, and electrolyte abnormalities

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.