Predictors of shunt-dependent hydrocephalus following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a pilot study in a single Egyptian institute

11Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Acute hydrocephalus can cause neurological deterioration after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Predicting which patient would require shunting is challenging. Methods: This prospective study was conducted upon twenty patients who suffered acute hydrocephalus due to subarachnoid hemorrhage of ruptured aneurysms. Surgical or non-surgical management of hydrocephalus was conducted. Glasgow Coma scale (GCS) was assessed, and hydrocephalus was graded by bicaudate index. Fisher grade was determined from CT scan. Aneurysm site was determined by conventional or CT angiography. Either surgical clipping or endovascular coiling of aneurysms was performed. Results: Initially, 3 (15%) patients had emergency CSF diversion on admission due to poor GCS on arrival. Initially, the remaining 17 patients were managed conservatively. Five patients did not require any intervention. Twelve patients had external ventricular drainage placement, 4 were weaned, and 8 failed weaning. High bicaudate index (> 0.2) correlated with shunting. Aneurysm site correlated well with shunting (ACoA or PCoA). Conclusions: Patients with fair GCS can be managed conservatively. Any deterioration warrants shifting to CSF diversion. Higher bicaudate index will usually need CSF diversion. The value of Fisher carries no significant value. Aneurysm location (ACoA or PCoA) correlates with an increased incidence of ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aboul-Ela, H. M., Salah El-Din, A. M., Zaater, A. A., Shehab, M., & El Shahawy, O. A. (2018). Predictors of shunt-dependent hydrocephalus following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a pilot study in a single Egyptian institute. Egyptian Journal of Neurology, Psychiatry and Neurosurgery, 54(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41983-018-0015-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free