Neurosurgery · 2013
Role of endoscopic third ventriculostomy and ventriculoperitoneal shunt in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: preliminary results of a randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pinto Fernando Campos Gomes, Saad Felippe, Oliveira Matheus Fernandes de, Pereira Renan Muralho, Miranda Fernanda Letkaske de, Tornai Juliana Benevenuto, Lopes Maria Izabel Romão, Ribas Eduardo Santamaria Carvalhal, Valinetti Emilia Aparecida, Teixeira Manoel Jacobsen
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Currently, the most common treatment for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) is a ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS), generally with programmable valve implantation. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) is another treatment option, and it does not require prosthesis implantation.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the functional neurological outcome in patients after 12 months of treatment with INPH by using 2 different techniques: ETV or VPS.
METHODS: Randomized, parallel, open-label trial involving the study of 42 patients with INPH and a positive response to the tap test, from January 2009 to January 2012. ETV was performed with a rigid endoscope with a 30° lens (Minop, Aesculap), and VPS was performed with a fixed-pressure valve (PS Medical, Medtronic). The outcome was assessed 12 months after surgery. The neurological function outcomes were based on the results of 6 clinical scales: mini-mental, Berg balance, dynamic gait index, functional independence measure, timed up and go, and normal pressure hydrocephalus.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups after 12 months of follow-ups, and the VPS group showed better improvement results (ETV = 50%, VPS = 76.9%).
CONCLUSION: Compared with ETV, VPS is a superior method because it had better functional neurological outcomes 12 months after surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the functional neurological outcome in patients after 12 months of treatment with INPH by using 2 different techniques: ETV or VPS.
METHODS: Randomized, parallel, open-label trial involving the study of 42 patients with INPH and a positive response to the tap test, from January 2009 to January 2012. ETV was performed with a rigid endoscope with a 30° lens (Minop, Aesculap), and VPS was performed with a fixed-pressure valve (PS Medical, Medtronic). The outcome was assessed 12 months after surgery. The neurological function outcomes were based on the results of 6 clinical scales: mini-mental, Berg balance, dynamic gait index, functional independence measure, timed up and go, and normal pressure hydrocephalus.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups after 12 months of follow-ups, and the VPS group showed better improvement results (ETV = 50%, VPS = 76.9%).
CONCLUSION: Compared with ETV, VPS is a superior method because it had better functional neurological outcomes 12 months after surgery.