External Ventricular Drainage Infections Rates: Clinic Experiences

In this study, we aimed to evaluate patients who develop ventriculostomy requirements and to evaluate the external ventricular drainage infection rates retrospectively at our clinic. In the study, dates between January 2012 and 2014, patients who were inserted external ventricular drainage with different indications were examined retrospectively. By using the medical record system, patients’ demographics (age, sex), diagnostic, ventriculostomy indications and ventriculostomy time had been reached. By accessing laboratory data, the patients’ cultures of cerebrospinal fluids biochemical tests were analyzed retrospectively. Within the period of the study, 20 in 117 patients with external ventricular drainage were not included the study because of shunt infection and shunt occlusion of extracted patients. During the treatment period 148 EVD were inserted to 97 patients. The number of male patients was 53;the number of female patients was 44. When the reason of the examined patients’ using external ventricular drainage was analyzed, 55% hemorrhagic cerebrovascular diseases, (subarachnoid hemorrhage, intraventricular hemorrhage, intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebellar hemorrhage, traumatic intracranial injury), 24.7% tumor induced use, 7.4% central nervous system infections (menengitis, apse), and 12.4% occlusive cerebrovascular diseases (hydrocephalus or brain edema that were developed after the infarct) were seen. During the course of our study, 23% of the surveyed 97 patients had leukocytosis. CFT culture of 12 patients found positive. In CFT cultures mostly coagulase-negative staphylococcus growth took place. Eventually, when we compare our infection proportions to the international literature, very large differences were not observed. Except for revisioned patients, no other criteria were found that increased the rate of infection. We think that a rigorous pre-operative preparation and a regular maintenance of external ventricular drainage may reduce the rate of infection.

Is External Ventricular Drainage Life-Saving in Cerebellar Hemorrhages?

Background: The treatment of cerebellar hemorrhage (CH) may be different surgery or conservative according to the hematoma volume, compression of vital structures or hydrocephalus existence. In the present study, the authors investigated the risk factors, the indications and the situation of external ventricular drainage (EVD) on the treatment line. Methods: 63 pure cerebellar hemorrhage patients were enrolled in the study. 36 cases underwent surgery;the other 27 were received conservative treatment. 15 and 13 cases received EVD in both groups. Hospital stay and mortality rates were investigated. Results: 4 cases in the conservative group underwent surgery secondary to treatment failure. Both of the groups had equal rates of morbidity and mortality. On the other hand, the group that received surgical intervention had shorter median hospital stay. The EVD does not seem to be life-saving at first but it gives time for preparing for surgery. Conclusions: We found that CH was strongly associated with early hydrocephalus and mortality. The early diagnosis and surgical evacuation of the mass are mandatory and life-saving if hematoma is larger than 10 ml. The EVD may not being a life-saving instrument but majorly it may be a time earning device if acute hydrocephalus present.

Advances in surgical treatment of intraventricular hemorrhage

Intraventricular hemorrhage(IVH)is a dangerous acute cerebrovascular disease.The 30-day mortality rate of patients with IVH is 5 times that of patients with cerebral hemorrhage.In recent years,more and more studies have shown that timely clearance of intraventricular hematoma is closely related to good prognosis.The advantages of surgical intervention in patient management are impressive.This article briefly reviews the positive advances in the surgical treatment of IVH such as external ventricular drainage(EVD)combined with intraventricular fibrinolysis(IVF)and continuous lumbar cistern drainage(LCD),as well as their safety and efficacy,especially the remarkable role of neuroendoscopy in the removal of intraventricular hematomas.

Modified ventricular puncture combined with urokinase in the treatment of secondary intraventricular cast hemorrhage

Background: We introduce a new catheter-based minimally invasive approach via frontal tuber for removing hypertensive intraventricular hemorrhage(IVH), and further compare its treatment efficacy with conventional external ventricular drainage (EVD).Methods: This study is prospective and randomized.Sixty cases of secondary intraventricular cast hemorrhage patients were randomly divided into two groups of 30 cases: modified ventricular puncture (MVP) group and control group.Preoperative Glasgow coma scale (GCS) and Graeb score were compared between the two groups.The postoperative manifestations of two groups were also analyzed and compared statistically, including evacuation rate of intraventricular hematoma in 24 h, the time with drainage tube, rebleeding, complicated by infection, shunt-dependent hydrocephalus and Glasgow outcome scale at 3 months.Results: 1.There was no significant difference in preoperative GCS score and the Graeb score between two groups (P ＞ 0.05).2.In the MVP group via frontal tuber approach, a substantial removal of intraventricular hematoma was achieved in all cases.The average evacuation rate of intraventricular hematoma reached 80.10 ± 10.16 ％, the average time of catheter drainage was 3.17 ± 0.87 days, the average GOS was 3.80 ± 0.92, no intracranial infection and secondary hemorrhage were observed following surgery in all cases, and shunt-dependent hydrocephalus occurred in 2 cases.In the control group, the hematoma evacuation rate was an average of 21.21 ± 7.81％, the time of drainage was an average of 7.63 ± 2.87 days, the GOS was an average of 3.20 ± 1.12, intracranial infection after surgery occurred in 5 cases, secondary hemorrhage was observed in 1 case, and shunt-dependent hydrocephalus occurred in 8 cases.Between the two groups there were significantly statistical difference in the hematoma evacuation rate, drainage duration, infection rate and GOS (all P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions: The new approach is safe, and can quickly remove the hematoma, and significantly shorten the time with a pipe.It can also reduce the occurrence of infection and hydrocephalus, and improve overall outcome of patients, but cannot reduce mortality.