Cochrane · systematic review · CD012726
Ventriculo‐peritoneal shunting devices for hydrocephalus
Garegnani, L, Franco, JVA, Ciapponi, A, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNSAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
20
current version
GRADE rated
13
No studies
6
Included studies
NR
No studies 6 · 30%Ungraded 1 · 5%Very low 4 · 20%Low 9 · 45%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Standard valve compared to anti‐syphon valve for hydrocephalus
Population: participants with hydrocephalus
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment failure: morbidity associated with shunt placement that led to shunt revision Standard valve vs anti‐syphon valve | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 296 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events: morbidity related to the shunt placement that has not led to shunt revision Standard valve vs anti‐syphon valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality In the early postoperative period (≤ 30 days) Standard valve vs anti‐syphon valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality Beyond the early postoperative period (> 30 days) Standard valve vs anti‐syphon valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Quality of life Standard valve vs anti‐syphon valve | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Comparison between different types of standard valves
Population: participants with hydrocephalus
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment failure: morbidity associated with shunt placement that led to shunt revision | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 174 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events: morbidity related to the shunt placement that has not led to shunt revision | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Mortality In the early postoperative period (≤ 30 days) | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 174 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality Beyond the early postoperative period (> 30 days) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 90 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Quality of life | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Standard valve compared to self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve for hydrocephalus
Population: participants with hydrocephalus
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment failure: morbidity associated with shunt placement that led to shunt revision Standard valve vs self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events: morbidity related to the shunt placement that has not led to shunt revision Standard valve vs self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality In the early postoperative period (≤ 30 days) Standard valve vs self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality Beyond the early postoperative period (> 30 days) Standard valve vs self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 229 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Quality of life Standard valve vs self‐adjusting CSF flow‐regulating valve | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
External differential programmable pressure valve compared to non‐programmable valves
Population: participants with hydrocephalus
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment failure: morbidity associated with shunt placement that led to shunt revision External differential programmable pressure valve vs non‐programmable valves | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 377 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events: morbidity related to the shunt placement that has not led to shunt revision External differential programmable pressure valve vs non‐programmable valves | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 377 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Mortality In the early postoperative period (≤30 days) External differential programmable pressure valve vs non‐programmable valves | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Mortality Beyond the early postoperative period (>30 days) External differential programmable pressure valve vs non‐programmable valves | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life External differential programmable pressure valve vs non‐programmable valves | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |