Economic Analysis of Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy and Ventricular Shunts

  • Hugh Garton
  • Paul Steinbok


Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) is the principal alternative therapy to shunt placement. Fueled by the persistent complications associated with CSF shunt placement and aided by the development of new instruments and better optical and video systems, ETV is becoming performed routinely in the management of hydrocephalus. However, not all patients with hydrocephalus are candidates for this procedure (see Chap. 25). As ETV has become more routinely performed, attempts to determine an optimal strategy for integration of this new technology into the management of hydrocephalus have focused primarily on identifying the subpopulation of patients in whom the procedure is “most effective” in eliminating the need for shunt placement. In selecting patients for ETV on clinical grounds, one weighs the obvious benefits of remaining or becoming shunt-free against the added risk of the procedure itself and, if it is unsuccessful, the added inconvenience and risk of a second surgical procedure for placement of a shunt.


Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy Shunt Infection Shunt Placement Shunt Revision Aqueductal Stenosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barlow P, Ching HS: An economic argument in favour of endoscopic third ventriculostomy as a treatment for obstructive hydrocephalus. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 40:37–39, 1997PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bierbrauer KS, Storrs BB, McLone DG, et al: A prospective, randomized study of shunt function and infections as a function of shunt placement. Pediatr Neurosurg 16:287–291, 1990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Billard C, Santini JJ, Gillet P, et al: Long-term intellectual prognosis of hydrocephalus with reference to 77 children. Pediatr Neurosci 12:219–225, 1985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bondurant C, Jimenez D: Epidemiology of cerebrospinal fluid shunting. Pediatr Neurosurg 23:254–258, 1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brockmeyer D, Abtin K, Carey L, et al: Endoscopic third ventriculostomy: an outcome analysis. Pediatr Neurosurg 28:236–240, 1998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buxton N, Cartmill M, Vloeberghs M: Endoscopic third ventriculostomy: outcome analysis of 100 consecutive procedures. Neurosurgery 45:795–806, 1999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caldarelli M, Di Rocco C, La Marca F: Shunt complications in the first postoperative year in children with meningomyelocele. Child’s Nerv Syst 12:748–754, 1996Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chumas P, et al: III Ventriculostomy in the management of posterior fossa tumors in children. Child’s Nerv Syst 11:540, 1995Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cinalli G, Sainte-Rose C, Chumas P, et al: Failure of third ventriculostomy in the treatment of aqueductal stenosis in children. J Neurosurg 90:448–454, 1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cochrane D, Kestle J, Steinbok P, et al: Model for the cost analysis of shunted hydrocephalic children. Pediatr Neurosurg 23:14–19, 1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Di Rocco C, Marchese E, Velardi F: A survey of the first complication of newly implanted CSF shunt devices for the treatment of nontumoral hydrocephalus. Cooperative survey of the 1991–1992 Education Committee of the ISPN. Child’s Nerv Syst 10:321–327, 1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Drake JM, Kestle J: Determining the best cerebrospinal fluid shunt valve design: the pediatric valve design trial. Neurosurgery 38:604–607, 1996PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Drake JM, Kestle JR, Milner R, et al: Randomized trial of cerebrospinal fluid shunt valve design in pediatric hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 43:294–303, 1998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Drummond MF, et al: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Drummond MF, Richardson WF, O’Brien BJ, et al: Users’ guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 277:1552–1557, 1997PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garton H, Kestle JR, Cochrane DD, et al: A cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Neurosurgery 51:69–78, 2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goumnerova LC, Frim DM: Treatment of hydrocephalus with third ventriculocisternostomy: outcome and CSF flow patterns. Pediatr Neurosurg 27:149–152, 1997PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jamjoom AB, Jamjoom ZA, Rahman NU: Low rate of shunt revision in tumoral obstructive hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir 140:595–597, 1998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jones R, et al: Neuroendoscopic third ventriculostomy. In: Manwaring K, Crone K (eds) Neuroendoscopy. Liebert, New York, pp 63–77, 1992Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jones RF, Kwok BC, Stening WA, et al: The current status of endoscopic third ventriculostomy in the management of non-communicating hydrocephalus. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 37:28–36, 1994PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kast J, Duong D, Nowzari F, et al: Time related patterns of ventricular shunt failure. Child’s Nerv Syst 10:524–528, 1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McCallum JE, Turbeville D: Cost and outcome in a series of shunted premature infants with intraventricular hemorrhage. Pediatr Neurosurg 20:63–67, 1994PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    O’Brien MS, Harris ME: Long-term results in the treatment of hydrocephalus. Neurosurg Clin North Am 4:625–632, 1993Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Piatt JH: Cerebrospinal fluid shunt failure: late is different from early. J Neurosurg 82:363, 1995Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Piatt JH Jr, Carlson CV: A search for determinants of cerebrospinal fluid shunt survival: retrospective analysis of a 14-year institutional experience. Pediatr Neurosurg 19:233–241, 1993 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pikus HJ, Levy ML, Gans W, et al: Outcome, cost analysis, and long-term follow-up in preterm infants with massive grade IV germinal matrix hemorrhage and progressive hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 40:983–988, 1997PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sainte-Rose C: Third ventriculostomy. In: Manwaring K, Crone K (eds) Neuroendoscopy. Liebert, New York, pp 47–62, 1992Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sainte-Rose C, Piatt JH, Renier D, et al: Mechanical complications in shunts. Pediatr Neurosurg 17:2–9, 1991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sgouros S, Mallucci C, Walsh AR, et al: Long-term complications of hydrocephalus. Pediatr Neurosurg 23:127–132, 1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Teo C, Jones RF: Management of hydrocephalus by endoscopic third ventriculostomy in patients with myelomeningocele. Pediatr Neurosurg 25:57–63, 1996PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Teo C, Rahman S, Boop FA, et al: Complications of endoscopic neurosurgery. Child’s Nerv Syst 12:248–253, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tuli S, Alshail E, Drake JM: Third ventriculostomy versus cerebrospinal fluid shunt as a first procedure in pediatric hydrocephalus. Pediatr Neurosurg 30:11–15, 1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tuli S, O’Hayon B, Drake JM, et al: Change in ventricular size and effect of ventricular catheter placement in pediatric patients with shunted hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 45:1329–1333, 1999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Walker M, Petronio J, Carey C: Ventriculostomy. In: Cheek W (ed) Pediatric neurosurgery: surgery of the developing nervous system. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 572–581, 1994Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hugh Garton
    • 1
  • Paul Steinbok
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery, British Columbia’s Children’s Hospital, and Division of Neurosurgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations