Laparoscopic versus open insertion of the peritoneal catheter in ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement: review of 810 consecutive cases.

OBJECT: Traditional ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt surgery involves insertion of the distal catheter by minilaparotomy. However, minilaparotomy may be a significant source of morbidity during shunt surgery. Laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter is an alternative technique that may simplify and improve the safety of shunt surgery.

METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of hospital records of all patients undergoing new VP shunt insertion at a tertiary care center between 2004 and 2009. Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients undergoing open or laparoscopic insertion of the distal catheter. Independent variables in the analysis included age, sex, race, body mass index, surgical technique, previous VP shunt placement, previous abdominal procedures, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score, and indication for shunt placement. Dependent variables included the occurrence of shunt failure, cause of shunt failure, complications, length of stay (LOS), LOS after shunt placement, estimated blood loss, and operative time.

RESULTS: The authors identified 810 patients who met the inclusion criteria; open or laparoscopic distal catheter insertion was performed in 335 and 475 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups regarding age, race, ASA score, or indication for shunt placement. The most common indication was hydrocephalus due to subarachnoid hemorrhage, followed by tumor-associated hydrocephalus, normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH), and hydrocephalus due to trauma. The incidence of shunt failure was not statistically different between cohorts, occurring in 20.0% of laparoscopic and 20.9% of open catheter placement cases (p = 0.791). With analysis of causes of shunt failure, shunt obstruction occurred significantly more often in the open surgery cohort (p = 0.012). In patients with a known cause shunt obstruction, distal obstruction occurred in 35.7% of the open cohort obstructions and 4.8% of the laparoscopic cohort obstructions (p = 0.014). The relative risk of distal obstruction in open cases compared with laparoscopic cases was 7.50. Infections occurred in 8.2% of laparoscopic cases compared with 6.6% of open cases (p = 0.419). Within the NPH subgroup, the laparoscopically treated patients had significantly more overdrainage (p = 0.040), whereas those in the open cohort experienced significantly more shunt obstructions (p = 0.034). Laparoscopically treated patients had shorter operative times (p < 0.0005), inpatient LOS (p < 0.001), and inpatient LOS after VP shunt placement (p = 0.01) as well as less blood loss (p = 0.058).

CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the largest reported comparison of distal VP shunt catheter insertion techniques. Compared with minilaparotomy, the laparoscopic approach was associated with decreased time in the operating room and a decreased LOS. Moreover, laparoscopy was associated with fewer distal shunt obstructions. Laparoscopic shunt surgery is a viable alternative to traditional shunt surgery.