Does the simultaneous use of a neuroendoscope influence the incidence of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infection?

Página do item simplificado
dc.creatorAlexandre Varellagiannetti
dc.creatorFabiana Guerra Pimenta
dc.creatorWanessa Trindade Clemente
dc.date.accessioned2023-07-03T20:54:49Z
dc.date.accessioned2025-09-09T00:36:29Z
dc.date.available2023-07-03T20:54:49Z
dc.date.issued2017-02
dc.format.mimetypepdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.wneu.2016.10.092
dc.identifier.issn18788750
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1843/55704
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Neurosurgery
dc.rightsAcesso Restrito
dc.subjectNeuroendoscópios
dc.subjectDerivação Ventriculoperitoneal
dc.subjectHidrocefalia
dc.subjectInfecção
dc.subject.otherInfection
dc.subject.otherVentriculoperitoneal shunt
dc.subject.otherHydrocephalus
dc.subject.otherNeuroendoscopy
dc.titleDoes the simultaneous use of a neuroendoscope influence the incidence of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infection?
dc.typeArtigo de periódico
local.citation.epage175
local.citation.spage171
local.citation.volume98
local.description.resumoBACKGROUND: The relationship between the use of an endoscope during ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) pro cedures and infection remains poorly defined. In this study, we sought to analyze whether the simultaneous use of an endoscope could in fact increase the infection rate asso ciated with VPS procedures. METHODS: This study included 438 VPS procedures, 49 in which an endoscope was used (11.2%) and 389 in which an endoscope was not used (88.8%). The infection rates in these 2 main groups were calculated and compared. Sub sequently, 4 new groups were created, composed of patients with a shunt inserted for the first time (groups 1A and 1B) and patients with a shunt reviewed or inserted for a second time (groups 2A and 2B). Groups 1A and 2A comprised patients in whom an endoscope was used simultaneously with VPS surgery, and groups 1B and 2B comprised patients in whom an endoscope was not used. These groups were compared to determine the infection rate. RESULTS: The overall infection rate was 18.5%, including 22.4% in the groups in which an endoscope was used and 18% in those in which an endoscope was not used (P [ 0.449). Groups 1A and 1B and groups 2A and 2B were matched for possible intervening risk factors. The infection rate was 28.6% in group 1A and 16.2% in group 1B (P [ 0.27), and 20% in group 2A and 19.8% in group 2B (P [ 0.977).CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, the use of an endoscope during VPS procedures did not increase the risk of surgical infection.
local.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0848-3740
local.publisher.countryBrasil
local.publisher.departmentICB - DEPARTAMENTO DE MORFOLOGIA
local.publisher.departmentMED - DEPARTAMENTO DE CIRURGIA
local.publisher.departmentMED - DEPARTAMENTO DE PROPEDÊUTICA COMPLEMENTAR
local.publisher.initialsUFMG
local.url.externahttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878875016310816?via%3Dihub

Arquivos

Licença do pacote

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
License.txt
Tamanho:
1.99 KB
Formato:
Plain Text
Descrição:
Baixar

Coleções

Artigo de Periódico

Logo UFMG