Suppr超能文献

脑室-腹腔分流术与脑室-心房脑脊液分流术在翻修率和耐用性方面的比较。

A comparison between ventriculo-peritoneal and ventriculo-atrial cerebrospinal fluid shunts in relation to rate of revision and durability.

作者信息

Borgbjerg B M, Gjerris F, Albeck M J, Hauerberg J, Børgesen S V

机构信息

University Clinic of Neurosurgery, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1998;140(5):459-64; discussion 465. doi: 10.1007/s007010050125.

Abstract

Results of 884 first-time shunts inserted in the time period from 1958 to 1989 are retrospectively evaluated, 1) to perform a durability analysis of a shunt based on Kaplan-Meyer method, 2) to compare the rate of revision for ventriculo-atrial (VA) and ventriculo-peritoneal (VP) shunts, 3) to compare the durability of a VA shunt with a VP shunt and 4) to do a stratified durability analysis comparing the VA and VP shunts in relation to the following background variables: shunt type, time period and age of the patient. Furthermore the specific complications related to VA and VP shunts are identified based on findings in the literature. Overall one-year shunt durability is 57% and five-year shunt durability is 37%. The median shunt durability is 1.68 years. Revision rate is 51% for VA shunts and 38.5% for VP (p < 0.05). Shunt durability is longer for VP shunts though the difference is not significant (p < 0.1). By use of stratified analysis of shunt durability no differences however are found between the two shunting methods. Hence the apparent difference in revision rate between VA and VP shunts seems secondary to variations in follow-up time and variations in background variables. To supplement our statistical analysis we have performed a literature study to look at the specific complications associated with VA and VP shunts. It seems as if the specific complications in relation to the VA shunting method are more severe than in relation to the VP shunting method.

摘要

对1958年至1989年期间首次植入的884例分流器的结果进行回顾性评估,目的如下:1)基于Kaplan-Meyer方法对分流器进行耐用性分析;2)比较脑室-心房(VA)分流术和脑室-腹腔(VP)分流术的翻修率;3)比较VA分流术和VP分流术的耐用性;4)针对以下背景变量对VA和VP分流术进行分层耐用性分析:分流器类型、时间段和患者年龄。此外,根据文献中的研究结果确定与VA和VP分流术相关的特定并发症。总体而言,分流器的一年耐用率为57%,五年耐用率为37%。分流器的中位耐用时间为1.68年。VA分流术的翻修率为51%,VP分流术的翻修率为38.5%(p<0.05)。VP分流器的耐用时间更长,尽管差异不显著(p<0.1)。通过对分流器耐用性的分层分析,未发现两种分流方法之间存在差异。因此,VA和VP分流术在翻修率上的明显差异似乎是由于随访时间的差异和背景变量的差异所致。为补充我们的统计分析,我们进行了一项文献研究,以探讨与VA和VP分流术相关的特定并发症。与VP分流术相比,VA分流术相关的特定并发症似乎更严重。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验