gms | German Medical Science

68. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC)
7. Joint Meeting mit der Britischen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (SBNS)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC) e. V.

14. - 17. Mai 2017, Magdeburg

External ventricular drain placement: Two techniques-one result?

Meeting Abstract

  • Christine Brand - Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
  • Wilhelm Kielhorn - Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
  • Andrej Pala - Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
  • Christian Rainer Wirtz - Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
  • Thomas Kapapa - Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie. Society of British Neurological Surgeons. 68. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC), 7. Joint Meeting mit der Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS). Magdeburg, 14.-17.05.2017. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2017. DocP 117

doi: 10.3205/17dgnc680, urn:nbn:de:0183-17dgnc6803

Veröffentlicht: 9. Juni 2017

© 2017 Brand et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Gliederung

Text

Objective: Placement of ventricular drains (VD) is one of the most common procedures in neurosurgery. Priority should be given to avoidance of complications like infections, malposition and procedure associated haemorrhages. Furthermore, the technique should be cost-efficient, feasible and quickly available. We compared two techniques of VD placement in respect of those factors.

Methods: In this oberservative-descriptive study patients with acute hydrocephalus and the necessity of a VD insertion are compared concerning complications rate by their placement technique: twist drillbore (tdb) hole versus trepan bore (tb)hole trepanation. The further comparisons include the location of surgery: operating theatre versus ICU versus emergency room. Statistical criterias include malpositioning (definition: VD outside the ipsilateral ventricle), infection rate and bleeding complications. Significance was put up to p≤0.05.

Results: 147 (42%) patients receive the VD via twist drill bore (Tdb) hole and 201 (57,4%) patients via trepan bore (tb) hole trepanation. There were no differences between infection rate Ntdb= 14 (9,5%) versus Ntb= 8 (4%), (p=0,154) and the frequency procedure associated bleedings Ntdb= 8 (5,4%) versus Ntb= 12 (6%), (p=0,167) in both groups. Patients, getting their VD via trepan bore hole, had a significant lower risk for malposition Ntdb= 36 (24,5%) versus Ntb= 42 (20,9%) (p=0,05). However, there was no significant difference at all for intraparenchymal malposition (p=0,06). Furthermore there was no significant difference between the location of surgery and the infections rate (p=0,339).

Conclusion: Placement of VD via twist drill bore hole is an adequate procedure to trepan bore hole related to infection- and bleeding rate. Frequency of malposition in twist drill bore hole is higher. However, the incidence of relevant malpositions (intraparenchymal malposition) does not differ significantly from both techniques. Advantages of tdb are the independence of the location of the surgery and therefor the quick practicability.