ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Current Trends in the Treatment of Pediatric Hydrocephalus: A Narrative Review Centered on the Indications, Safety, Efficacy, and Long-Term Outcomes of Available Treatment Modalities.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical characteristics, diagnosis, and management of central nervous system aspergillosis in children: a single-center experience.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Understanding barriers to pediatric hydrocephalus management: an international survey.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Surgical outcomes of scalp transposition flap reconstruction in pediatric patients with ventriculoperitoneal shunt exposure.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Hyperechoic ependyma in preterm infants: sonographic features associated with ependymal injury and complex hydrocephalus.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pathophysiologic substrate of pediatric hydrocephalus has not been thoroughly elucidated. Valve-based shunt systems have constituted the main therapeutic option since the late 1950s. The initially used systems were concerning the ventricular system and the atrium. In the 1970s, VA shunts were not the main stay of treatment as the preferred option for the terminal end of the drainage system was the peritoneum. Our review analyzes these valve types and attempts a comparison, based on their functional characteristics. Nowadays, the only available surgical alternative for the treatment of hydrocephalus is ETV. This technique is associated with lower infection rates as well as, on average, a lower re-operation rate. Another term that deserves special mention is related to the outcome of ETV in children who had a medical history of previously incorporated shunts and who were subsequently suffering from shunt malfunction. Well-recognized predictive factors associated with secondary ETV failure include age, early onset of hydrocephalus, and prematurity. Although several attempts have been made in order to establish the optimum surgical treatment management in the different subgroups of patientswho are suffering from shunt dysfunction, there is no universal agreement. Therefore, this review attempts to identify the specific subpopulations of patients in whom the insertion of a drainage system as the preferred treatment modality is associated with an optimum long-term prognosis, compared to ETV, and vice versa. The objective of our study is to analyze the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of drainage devices and ETV in pediatric hydrocephalus patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.