Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 12, 2025
Author Spotlight: Recent Advancements in Reoperative Foregut Surgery
Published on: September 22, 2023
Re-Do endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Retrospective analysis of 13 patients
Jorge Linares Torres1, Bienvenido Ros López1, Sara Iglesias Moroño1
1Servicio de Neurocirugía, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Málaga, España.
Objetives:
Indication for endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) in the treatment for noncommunicating hydrocephalus is widely accepted. There is controversy regarding the indication of a second procedure (re-ETV) when the first has failed. The objective of this work is to revise ETV failures in a series in which re-ETV was performed and to describe the factors related to its prognosis.
Method:
Retrospective study of pediatric patients with ETV failure treated by re-ETV between 2003 and 2018. Gender, age in first and second ETV, time to failure of first ETV, etiology of hydrocephalus, previous presence of shunt, ETV-SS in the first and second ETV, intraoperative findings, success of the second procedure and follow-up were collected. The ETV-SS result was grouped into high (≥80), moderate (50-70) or low (≤40) scores. Endoscopic procedure failure was considered clinical worsening or the absence of radiological criteria for improvement (reduction in ventricular size or presence of ETV flow artifact in the floor of third ventricle).
Results:
Of 97 ETV carried out in this period, 47 failures were registered, with 13 re-ETV performed. Of these, 8 were classified as successful (61.53%). Re-ETV was successful in 4/4 cases in which etiology was tectal tumor or aqueduct stenosis. In the group with a high ETV-SS score there was a higher rate of success (75%) than in the group with a moderate score (40%). 9 patients presented shunt prior to first ETV and in them, success was 66.6% compared to 50% in the group without prior shunt. All re-ETV were performed without complications. In 11 of the 13 procedures a closed stoma was found and the remaining 2 cases, we found a punctate opening. The mean follow-up after re-ETV was 61.23 months.
Conclusion:
The selection of patients for re-VET should be cautious. Factors such as age, etiology, and previous shunt (ETV-SS factors) have prognostic influence. However, there are specific factors which indicate favorable prognostic for re-VET such as a longer time to failure of the first procedure, the finding of a closed/punctate stoma or the loss of flow artifact in the follow-up MRI.
