Endoscopic Third Ventriculostomy versus Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt in Patients with Obstructive Hydrocephalus: An...

Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) and ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) are surgical methods for treating obstructive hydrocephalus. However, there is still disagreement regarding the most effective technique, in terms of both operative success and postoperative complications. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of these two methods in patients with obstructive hydrocephalus. We performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ETV and VPS in pediatric or adult patients with obstructive hydrocephalus were included. The outcomes included were operative success, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak, postoperative infection, postoperative or intraoperative bleeding, blockage rate, and mortality. The risk ratio (RR) was calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was evaluated with I ² statistics. We used a fixed-effects model for outcomes with I ²  < 25% and DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model for other conditions. The Cochrane collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials was used for risk-of-bias assessment. R, version 4.2.1, was used for statistical analyses. Of the 2,353 identified studies, 5 RCTs were included, involving 310 patients with obstructive hydrocephalus, of which 163 underwent ETV. There was a significant difference in favor of ETV for postoperative infection (risk ratio [RR]: 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.33; p  < 0.0001; I ²  = 0%) and blockage rate (RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.03-0.75; p  = 0.02; I ²  = 53%). Meanwhile, there was no significant difference between groups for the postoperative or intraoperative bleeding (RR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.17-1.15; p  = 0.09; I ²  = 0%), postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.22-1.92; p  = 0.44; I ²  = 18%), operative success (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.77-1.82; p  = 0.44; I ²  = 84%), and mortality (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.03-1.09; p  = 0.06; I ²  = 0%). Three RCTs had some concerns about the risk of bias and one RCT had a high risk of bias due to the process of randomization and selection of reported results. Thus, this meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating ETV compared with VPS demonstrated that although there is no superiority of ETV in terms of operative success, the incidence of complications was significantly higher in patients who underwent VPS. Our results suggest that the use of ETV provides greater benefits for the treatment of obstructive hydrocephalus. However, more RCTs are needed to corroborate the superiority of ETV.