Neonatal post-haemorrhagic hydrocephalus in the UK: a survey of current practice. (4th May 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kumar, Naveen; Al-Faiadh, Wisam; Tailor, Jignesh; Mallucci, Conor; Chandler, Chris; Bassi, Sanj; Pettorini, Benedetta; Zebian, Bassel
• Is Part Of: British journal of neurosurgery. Volume 31:Number 3(2017)
• Page Start: 307
• Page End: 311
• Publication Date: 2017-05-04
• Subjects: Neonate -- premature -- preterm -- intraventricular haemorrhage -- hydrocephalus -- cerebrospinal fluid -- ventricular tap -- lumbar puncture -- ventricular access device -- reservoir -- ventriculosubgaleal shunt -- external ventricular drain -- ventriculoperitoneal shunt -- endoscopic third ventriculostomy; Nervous system -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.48
• DOI: 10.1080/02688697.2016.1226260
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0268-8697

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: The management of neonatal post-haemorrhagic hydrocephalus (nPHH) varies considerably between centres and even between neurosurgeons in the same centre. We performed a nationwide survey to evaluate current practice in the UK and reviewed the evidence for each intervention. Methods: An online semi-structured questionnaire was emailed to all units registered on the British Paediatric Neurosurgery Group Mailing List. The survey consisted of 18 questions designed to establish the status quo in the management of nPHH, including preferred temporising procedure, factors guiding the timing of intervention and willingness to participate in a prospective study. Results: A total of 24 consultants responded to the survey. Ventricular access device (VAD), trans-fontanelle tap, ventriculosubgaleal shunt (VSGS) and lumbar puncture (LP) were used by 33, 25, 17 and 17%, respectively, as the first temporising measure. Almost all reported that the timing of this intervention was guided by increasing head circumference and tense fontanelle. If the first temporising procedure fails, VAD, external ventricular drainage (EVD), trans-fontanelle tap, VSGS and other procedures (including ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunting and endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV)) were performed by 42, 17, 13, 8 and 21%, respectively. Almost all respondents reported that VP shunting would be their preferred method of definitive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion. Almost all responded that they would be willing to participate in a prospective study in the future to determine best practice. Conclusion: As expected there was a significant heterogeneity between respondents in the initial management of nPHH in the UK. VAD was the most popular first and second choice temporising measure. On reviewing the literature, it is clear that more work still needs to be done to establish which temporising measure is best. There is willingness in the UK to participate in a study to help determine this.