患儿分流术后分流管断裂1例伴文献复习
One Case of Shunt Fractured after Shunt Sur-gery in a Child with Related Literature Re-view
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2022.12121740, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 245  浏览: 304 
作者: 肖 宇, 王美华, 栗世方*:青岛大学附属医院神经外科,山东 青岛
关键词: 脑积水分流故障儿童Hydrocephalus Shunt Malfunction Children
摘要: 脑室腹腔分流术患者并发症较多,其中分流管断裂不容忽视。分流管断裂的确切原因和相对容易断裂的部位仍无明确答复。方法:在PubMed中以“脑积水、导管断裂、儿童”为检索词,检索1990年至2021年的相关文献,然后我们从89篇文献中提取9篇符合我们制作表格的需要。并且没有关于分流破裂并发症的在线综述文章。我们希望通过这篇文章能够给临床医生一些启示,对他们的临床决策提供一些帮助。结果:本综述中,我们发现分流管破裂最常见的部位是颈部,其次是胸部和腹部。儿童发生断裂的几率高于成人。结论:及时关注术后患者的症状和体征,尽早手术可能更有利于患者的恢复。
Abstract: There are many complications in patients with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt, of which shunt fracture should not be ignored. There is still no definite reply on the precise cause of shunt fracture and the site that is relatively easy to break. Methods: We searched the relevant literature from 1990 to 2021 with the search terms “hydrocephalus, catheter fracture, children” from PubMed, then we ex-tracted 9 of 89 articles that meet our needs to make a table. And there is no online review article on the complications of shunt rupture. We hope that through this article, we can give some inspiration to the clinicians and give some help to their clinical decision-making. Results: In this review, we found that the most common site of shunt rupture is the neck, followed by the chest and abdomen. Children have a higher chance of fracture than adults. Conclusions: Timely attention to the symp-toms and signs of postoperative patients and early surgery may be more conducive to the recovery of patients.
文章引用:肖宇, 王美华, 栗世方. 患儿分流术后分流管断裂1例伴文献复习[J]. 临床医学进展, 2022, 12(12): 12074-12080. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2022.12121740

1. 引言

1例10岁儿童因自发性脑出血后继发性脑积水行脑室腹腔分流术后10年入院。患者诉头痛伴恶心呕吐1月,癫痫加重两天。10年前,患者28天时因维生素K缺乏出现自发性脑出血。保守治疗40余天,后因脑积水在我科行侧脑室腹腔分流术。术后恢复良好,智力、语言、运动功能发育良好,与同龄儿童无差异。患者1个月前无明显诱因出现频繁头痛,为阵发性闷痛,伴恶心、呕吐。呕吐物为胃内容物甚至胆汁,无发热。无四肢轻瘫、视力、言语和听力丧失。头痛且常伴前胸壁假性囊肿,按揉后头痛症状可稍缓解。入院前2天出现全身癫痫发作,表现为意识丧失、四肢强直伴抽搐3分钟。入院时,患者意识清楚,言语流利,平均认知能力,脑神经功能无明显损害。四肢感觉及肌力正常。脑CT显示术后结果为脑积水和脑室扩张。上腹部CT显示脑室腹膜分流术后结果、腹壁和腹腔引流管阴影。胸部DR提示分流管断裂,颈部有管状影,上端位于右侧第2/3肋间水平,分流端相距约2 cm。胸腹部见管状影,下端位于右侧第5/6肋间水平。因此,诊断结果是脑室–腹腔分流术后导管断裂(图1)。

Figure 1. Preoperative radiograph of chest and abdomen shows obvious broken end

图1. 术前胸腹部X线片显示断端明显

2. 手术方式

再次行侧脑室腹腔分流术。以左额中线后2.5 cm、起始部后2.5 cm为中心切开头皮,制作小的弓形皮瓣。于上腹部正中直向腹腔作一长2 cm纵行切口。观察到初始脑室腹腔分流术的腹膜内部分。拔出尝试顺利。导管约15 cm。探查发现分流顶端与胸部严重粘连,难以拔出。因此,将分流管入腹腔端切断。在左侧重新定位脑室腹膜分流术。

术后复查CT示脑室腹腔分流安置良好,脑室大小改善,患者自诉头痛症状消失。术后3个月时,复查显示侧脑室明显变小,患者的症状显著改善,3个月内未再出现胸部假性囊肿和癫痫发作(图2)。

(A) (B) (C)

Figure 2. (A) Preoperative brain CT; (B) Brain CT the day after surgery; (C) Brain CT 3 months after surgery

图2. (A) 术前脑部CT;(B) 术后第一天颅脑CT检查;(C) 术后3个月颅脑CT

3. 讨论

脑积水是一种影响儿童大脑发育并导致智力残疾、癫痫和生活质量下降的脑部疾病。2008年,脑积水定义为“脑脊液从脑室内产生点至体循环吸收点的通道不充分导致的脑室系统活动性扩张” [1]。脑积水可分为先天性和非先天性,其中先天性脑积水在导水管狭窄中最为常见。这主要与调节大脑生长发育的基因有关。获得性脑积水与影响脑室流出、蛛网膜功能或脑静脉顺应性的病理过程相关 [2]。但学界有最近提出了一个新的理论,颅内搏动障碍说 [3] [4]。并且有研究发现,这一理论可能与婴幼儿特发性脑积水、年轻人特发性颅内高压、老年人正常压力脑积水有关 [5]。在这种情况下,儿童早期的脑出血可能引起蛛网膜功能紊乱和脑室阻塞,导致脑积水。难以判断该患者是否存在颅内波动障碍。20世纪90年代的一项流行病学调查显示,先天性脑积水是仅次于脊柱裂的第二大常见遗传病 [6]。因此,应重视其病因病机、治疗、预后。关于脑积水的治疗,脑室腹腔分流术(VPS)是治疗脑积水的经典手术方法。

但脑室腹腔分流术在改善患者脑积水症状的同时,分流失败率较高。在儿童患者中,置入后1年的V-P分流失败率为30%~40%,置入后2年为50% [7] [8] [9]。脑室腹腔分流术后并发症包括引流管堵塞、机械分离、引流管断裂和过度引流。加利福尼亚州一篇分析脑室腹膜分流术后并发症的文章报告称,儿童脑积水患者分流术后并发症发生率远高于成人,HR约为1.7,95% CI,1.4~1.7 [2]。另外,有报道特定原因引起的脑积水更容易导致脑室腹腔分流失败,如脑室内出血、脑肿瘤等 [3] [10] [11]。除上述因素外,文章还报告年龄、既往高血压、血管痉挛、脑室外引流持续时间和外引流均与分流依赖性脑积水显著相关 [12]。

为了解导管断裂现象是否为预期及断裂的相关原因,我们在PubMed中以“脑积水与分流断开及儿童”为检索词,检索了1990年至2022年的相关文献,共得到89篇相关文献。但是,筛选后共有9篇文章是我们需要的主题。因此,我们列出了一个表格来整理这9篇文章(表1)。入选和排除标准如下所示(图3)。表中重点关注文献纳入患者总数、统计是否为阳性、可能发生断裂的原因、最常见的断裂部位。

Table 1. Summary of reports of fractured shunt in children

表1. 儿童分流道断裂报告汇总

Figure 3. Including and excluding criteria

图3. 入选和排除标准

通过总结近20年的文献报道,我们可以发现颈部是最常见的断裂部位,其次为胸部和腹部,与我们报道病例的断裂部位基本相似。在儿童导管断裂的可能原因中,还有几个公认的主要原因:导管钙化、颈胸活动和生长压力、免疫因素导致的纤维化 [13] [21] [22] 等。分流钙化的患者发生分流破裂的可能性是无钙化患者的6.12倍 [13]。因此,探索不易与组织粘连和钙化的材料可能有助于防止分流破裂。但是,自1957年引入含硫酸钡的硅胶管以来,并没有获得更好的材料替代 [21]。在本病例中,我们认为发生断裂的主要原因可能是引流管位于患者皮下,由于免疫因素导致纤维细胞增生,引流管与组织发生粘连。且该患者在这十年间生长发育较快,长时间对引流管长轴施加压力导致引流管于胸腔断开。1977年,Raimondi等人分类为与一体式脑室腹腔分流术相比,三体式脑室腹腔(VP)分流术断开的可能性更高,为12%与1% [23]。在术前影像学资料及手术过程中,引流管未见明显钙化,这与上述文章描述不同。而在整理上述报道时,我们发现儿童分流管断开的发生率明显高于成人脑室腹腔分流术的并发症发生率 [14]。这也说明,患者的生长发育可能会急剧地促进引流管的断裂。1991年至1992年的大量病例报告得出结论,胸腹区域是最常见的断裂部位。通过文章表达,我们发现作者比较了连接器在胸腹联合部放置断裂的可能性,分别为39.4%和25.2%,在颈部 [15]。因此,最近将连接器放置在顶叶区域。

此外,在这种情况下,患者胸腔引流管破裂部位还出现了另一个皮下假性囊肿。该囊肿的大小与患者的症状明显相关。在PubMed上关于脑室腹腔分流引起的颈部、胸部或腹部假性囊肿的最早报道见于1979年。患者因分流术腹腔大量假性囊肿 [24]。在额外脑室腹膜分流术后,也应尽可能避免患者在分流侧颈部进行侵入性操作,因为有一篇文章报告了儿童期脑室腹膜分流术后颈部侵入性操作导致脑脊液漏引起的颈部假性囊肿 [25]。在该病例报告中1名儿童在出生时因先天性脑积水行脑室–腹腔分流术,患儿状态一直很好,直到10岁再次住院多次接受经皮穿刺静脉置管术,但均以失败告终,术后患者颈部出现一10 × 4 cm的肿块,伴有食欲不振,间歇性呕吐等症状,且头颈部X线未提示分流管不连。于头颈部CT检查见一水样密度空洞,最终手术取出该引流管证实为颈部有创操作而引起的脑脊液漏进而形成了颈部假性囊肿。

关于分流失败的管理,由于该病例表现出明显症状,例如头痛、恶心、呕吐等,因此采取了积极措施进行干预。分流破裂引起症状中最关键的因素是脑积水复发,引起颅内高压症状,表现为头痛、呕吐和嗜睡 [16]。有学者认为无明显临床症状的分流管破裂患者,因不确定症状是否由于皮下窦道形成进而导致脑脊液异常引流所致,脑脊液自头部向下经过引流管断裂处形成的皮下窦道到达腹腔,在临床上表现为无症状或轻微症状 [26] [27]。在临床上,我们应对分流患者进行及时随访。因为,定期随访可以为我们提供大量的临床资料,观察到更有意义的症状。另外,大量病例的临床研究报道术后并发症50%发生在术后2~7年内,因此术后7年内每年进行一次DR和CT检查是非常有意义的 [19]。而有学者进行的回顾性实验发现,27例非分流术依赖的患者中有24例手术时年龄小于6个月,这可能与CSF吸收机制成熟较晚有关 [28]。有证据表明,无症状时进行修复手术的预后优于有症状时 [29]。如果引流管闭塞,可能发生急性颅内高压。此外,上文已经提到,有时患者没有症状,但是分流管已经破入腹腔。如未发现断端可能导致腹腔感染,此时定期复查很关键 [28]。

分流失败应尽量避免,因为已有研究表明,分流术感染、癫痫和分流术次数与患者长期的言语智力下降密切相关 [30]。流量调节分流是一项良好措施,可限制过度引流和分流相关并发症的发生率 [31]。当分流失败时,第三脑室造口术也是医生的一种选择 [32]。但应注意的是,患者少于6个月或是早产儿时应谨慎选择。文章中提到小于3岁的分流失败的儿童可以从ETV中获得受益,并且其中有60%的患儿可以成为非分流依赖性患者。因此若在儿童期患儿出现分流失败,可在评估后行第三脑室造口术。

4. 结论

儿童脑室腹腔分流术后应定期复查,出现部分症状时应特别注意术后并发症的存在。通过总结文献,我们发现最常见的断裂部位位于颈部和胸部,最可能的原因是儿童的生长和钙化。

声明

未成年人的法定监护人提供了书面知情同意书,同意发表本文包含的任何潜在可识别图像或数据。

伦理批件

本研究为观察性研究。青岛大学附属医院伦理委员会确认不需要进行伦理审批。

发表同意书

作者确认人类研究参与者提供了在图1图2(a)~(c)中发表图像的知情同意书。

NOTES

*通讯作者Email: lsfpumc@163.com

参考文献

[1] Rekate, H.L. (2008) The Definition and Classification of Hydrocephalus: A Personal Recommendation to Stimulate De-bate. Cerebrospinal Fluid Research, 5, 2.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-8454-5-2
[2] Wu, Y., et al. (2007) Ven-triculoperitoneal Shunt Complications in California: 1990 to 2000. Neurosurgery, 61, 557-562.
https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000290903.07943.AF
[3] Greitz, D. (2007) Paradigm Shift in Hydrocephalus Research in Legacy of Dandy’s Pioneering Work: Rationale for Third Ventriculostomy in Communicating Hydrocepha-lus. Child’s Nervous System, 23, 487-489.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-007-0303-z
[4] Wagshul, M.E., Eide, P.K. and Madsen, J.R. (2011) The Pulsating Brain: A Review of Experimental and Clinical Studies of Intracranial Pulsatility. Fluids Barriers CNS, 8, 5.
https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-8118-8-5
[5] Bateman, G.A., Smith, R.L. and Siddique, S.H. (2007) Idiopathic Hy-drocephalus in Children and Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension in Adults: Two Manifestations of the Same Pathophysi-ological Process? Journal of Neurosurgery, 107, 439-444.
https://doi.org/10.3171/PED-07/12/439
[6] Di Rocco, C., Marchese, E. and Velardi, F. (1994) 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 Nervous System, 10, 321-327.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00335171
[7] Hanak, B.W., et al. (2017) Cere-brospinal Fluid Shunting Complications in Children. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 52, 381-400.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000452840
[8] Drake, J.M., et al. (1998) Randomized Trial of Cerebrospinal Fluid Shunt Valve Design in Pediatric Hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery, 43, 294-303.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-199808000-00068
[9] Fernández-Méndez, R., et al. (2019) Current Epidemi-ology of Cerebrospinal Fluid Shunt Surgery in the UK and Ireland (2004-2013). Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 90, 747-754.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-319927
[10] Lazareff, J.A., et al. (1998) Multiple Shunt Failures: An Analysis of Relevant Factors. Child’s Nervous System, 14, 271-275.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s003810050223
[11] Tuli, S., et al. (2000) Risk Factors for Repeated Cerebrospinal Shunt Failures in Pediatric Patients with Hydrocephalus. Journal of Neurosurgery, 92, 31-38.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2000.92.1.0031
[12] Yu, H., et al. (2014) The Relationship between Risk Factors and Prognostic Factors in Patients with Shunt-Dependent Hydrocephalus after Aneurysmal Sub-arachnoid Hemorrhage. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, 25, 902-906.
https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000000561
[13] Siddiqui, M.A., et al. (2019) Association between Ventricu-lar Shunt Catheter Calcifications and the Development of Shunt Fracture. Pediatric Radiology, 49, 1773-1780.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-019-04488-0
[14] Park, M.K., et al. (2015) A Retrospective Analysis of Ventricu-loperitoneal Shunt Revision Cases of a Single Institute. Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 57, 359-363.
https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2015.57.5.359
[15] Sainte-Rose, C., et al. (1991) Mechanical Complications in Shunts. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 17, 2-9.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000120557
[16] Erol, F.S., et al. (2017) Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Malfunction Caused by Fractures and Disconnections over 10 Years of Follow-Up. Child’s Nervous System, 33, 475-481.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-017-3342-0
[17] Langmoen, I.A., et al. (1992) Occurrence and Management of Fractured Peripheral Catheters in CSF Shunts. Child’s Nervous System, 8, 222-225.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262852
[18] Kaplan, M., et al. (2012) Is the Elapsed Time Following the Placement of a Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Catheter an Individual Risk Factor for Shunt Fractures? Pediatric Neurosurgery, 48, 348-351.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000353616
[19] Coll, G., et al. (2021) Mechanical Complications of Cerebrospi-nal Fluid Shunt. Differences between Adult and Pediatric Populations: Myths or Reality? Child’s Nervous System, 37, 2215-2221.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-021-05125-8
[20] Lee, Y.H., et al. (1998) What Should We Do with a Discontin-ued Shunt? Child’s Nervous System, 26, 791-796.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-009-1061-x
[21] Boch, A.L., et al. (1998) Mechanical Dysfunction of Ventriculop-eritoneal Shunts Caused by Calcification of the Silicone Rubber Catheter. Journal of Neurosurgery, 88, 975-982.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1998.88.6.0975
[22] Echizenya, K., et al. (1987) Mineralization and Biodegradation of CSF Shunting Systems. Journal of Neurosurgery, 67, 584-591.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1987.67.4.0584
[23] Raimondi, A.J., Robinson, J.S. and Kuwawura, K. (1977) Com-plications of Ventriculo-Peritoneal Shunting and a Critical Comparison of the Three-Piece and One-Piece Systems. Child’s Brain, 3, 321-342.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000119684
[24] Yamamoto, Y., Waga, S. and Okada, M. (1979) Large Abdominal Pseu-docyst as a Complication of Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt—Diagnosis by Ultrasonography and Whole Body CT Scan (Author’s Transl). No Shinkei Geka, 7, 589-592.
[25] Cho, K.H., et al. (2004) Neck Mass after Catheterization of a Neck Vein in a Child with Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 40, 182-185.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000081936
[26] Griebel, R., Khan, M. and Tan, L. (1985) CSF Shunt Complications: An Analysis of Contributory Factors. Child’s Nervous System, 1, 77-80.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00706686
[27] Iskandar, B.J., et al. (1998) Death in Shunted Hydrocephalic Children in the 1990s. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 28, 173-176.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000028644
[28] Iannelli, A., Rea, G. and Di Rocco, C. (2005) CSF Shunt Removal in Children with Hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochirurgica (Wien), 147, 503-507.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-005-0494-6
[29] Vinchon, M., et al. (2003) Shunt Revision for Asymptomatic Failure: Surgical and Clinical Results. Neurosurgery, 52, 347-353.
https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000043932.84900.70
[30] Gmeiner, M., et al. (2019) Adult Outcome in Shunted Pediatric Hydrocephalus: Long-Term Functional, Social, and Neurocognitive Results. World Neurosurgery, 132, e314-e323.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.167
[31] Hanlo, P.W., et al. (2003) Treatment of Hydrocepha-lus Determined by the European Orbis Sigma Valve II Survey: A Multicenter Prospective 5-Year Shunt Survival Study in Children and Adults in Whom a Flow-Regulating Shunt Was Used. Journal of Neurosurgery, 99, 52-57.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2003.99.1.0052
[32] Zhao, R., et al. (2016) Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy Instead of Shunt Revision in Children Younger than 3 Years of Age. World Neurosurgery, 88, 92-96.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2015.12.047