4.1 Article

Effect of introduction of a standardised peri-operative protocol on CSF shunt infection rate: a single-centre cohort study of 809 procedures

Journal

CHILDS NERVOUS SYSTEM
Volume 34, Issue 12, Pages 2407-2414

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00381-018-3953-0

Keywords

Hydrocephalus; Ventriculoperitoneal shunt; Intracranial infection; Paediatrics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeShunt infection is a major problem in paediatric neurosurgery. Our institution introduced a mandatory shunt protocol with the aim of reducing infection rate.MethodsA retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients undergoing permanent shunt operations (primary insertion and revision) across two study periods: 3years immediately prior (2009-2012) and 3years immediately after (2012-2015) protocol introduction. Absolute and relative risk reductions (ARR/RRR) and Chi-square statistical analysis was used alongside logistic regression, where any single factor with p0.20 included in the multivariate model, producing an odds ratio (OR).ResultsEight hundred nine operations in 504 children were identified (442 pre-protocol, 367 post). Overall infection rate decreased from 5.43% (24/442) pre-protocol to 3.27% (12/367) post-protocol (ARR=2.16%, RRR=39.8%, NNT=46.3, p=0.138), which did not reach statistical significance. For primary shunt insertions, infection rate reduced from 3.63 to 2.55% (ARR=1.08%, RRR=29.8%, NNT=92.6, p=0.565), whilst for revisions, it reduced from 6.83 to 3.81% (ARR=3.02%, RRR 44.2%, NNT=33.1, p=0.156). Multivariate logistic regression showed that surgeon experience was a statistically significant predictor of infection, whilst responsible pathogens and latency were similar across the pre- and post-protocol groups.ConclusionThe protocol reduced overall infection rate in primary and revision shunt operations and we recommend paediatric units consider introducing a similar protocol for these procedures.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available