Cystoperitoneal (CP) shunting is minimally invasive and achieves a high rate of resolution on neuroimaging. However, in the absence of definite symptoms, shunting should be reconsidered, because some patients can experience shunt dependency after CP shunting. In this study, the risk of shunt dependency in patients with arachnoid cysts treated with CP shunting and the management of these patients are described. Eight patients (7 boys and 1 girl) were diagnosed as shunt dependent following CP shunting. At the time of the first operation (mean age at first shunting 6.1 years, range 1–11 years), a causal relationship between symptoms and the arachnoid cyst was evident in only 2 cases. Clinical manifestations, neuroimaging (computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging) and intracranial pressure (ICP) data were reviewed retrospectively. The mean age of the patients at the time of shunt dependency was 9.8 years (range 6–13 years), and the mean time between the first shunt operation and shunt dependency was 41 months (range 17–80 months). Although neuroimaging demonstrated a collapsed cyst and small ventricles in most patients, ICP monitoring revealed significant intracranial hypertension. The release of shunt ligation, revision or additional shunting, such as ventriculoperitoneal shunting or lumboperitoneal shunting, resulted in the complete resolution of symptoms except in one patient who lost vision. This study shows that shunt dependency after CP shunting is a real problem and requires more attention. ICP monitoring can demonstrate the presence of intracranial hypertension when clinical and radiological analyses do not.

Keywords:
Arachnoid cyst, Children, Cystoperitoneal shunting, Shunt dependency
1.
Go KG, Houthoff HJ, Blaauw EH, Havinga P, Hartsuiker J: Arachnoid cysts of the sylvian fissure. Evidence of fluid secretion. J Neurosurg 1984;60:803–813.
2.
Soukup VM, Patterson J, Trier TT, Chen JW: Cognitive improvement despite minimal arachnoid cyst decompression. Brain Dev 1998;20:589–593.
3.
Caldarelli M: Congenital supratentorial arachnoidal cysts in children. Childs Nerv Syst 1997;13:358.
4.
Arai H, Sato K, Wachi A, Okuda O, Takeda N: Arachnoid cysts of the middle cranial fossa: Experience with 77 patients who were treated with cystoperitoneal shunting. Neurosurgery 1996;39:1108–1113.
5.
Ciricillo SF, Cogen PH, Harsh GR, Edwards MS: Intracranial arachnoid cysts in children. A comparison of the effects of fenestration and shunting. J Neurosurg 1991;74:230–235.
6.
Kaplan BJ, Mickle JP, Parkhurst R: Cystoperitoneal shunting for congenital arachnoid cysts. Childs Brain 1984;11:304–311.
7.
Stein SC: Intracranial development cysts in children: Treatment by cystoperitoneal shunting. Neurosurgery 1981;8:647–650.
8.
Fewel ME, Levy ML, McComb JG: Surgical treatment of 95 children with 102 intracranial arachnoid cysts. Pediatr Neurosurg 1996;25:165–173.
9.
Kang JK, Lee KS, Lee IW, Jeun SS, Son BC, Jung CK, Park YS, Lee SW: Shunt-independent surgical treatment of middle cranial fossa arachnoid cysts in children. Childs Nerv Syst 2000;16:111–116.
10.
Raffel C, McComb JG: To shunt or to fenestrate: Which is the best surgical treatment for arachnoid cysts in pediatric patients? Neurosurgery 1988;23:338–342.
11.
Sato H, Sato N, Katayama S, Tamaki N, Matsumoto S: Effective shunt-independent treatment for primary middle fossa arachnoid cyst. Childs Nerv Syst 1991;7:375–381.
12.
Aoki N, Sakai T, Umezawa Y: Slit ventricle syndrome after cyst-peritoneal shunting for the treatment of intracranial arachnoid cyst. Childs Nerv Syst 1990;6:41–43.
13.
Rappaport ZH: Suprasellar arachnoid cysts: Options in operative management. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1993;122:71–75.
14.
Galassi E, Tognetti F, Gaist G, Fagioli L, Frank F, Frank G: CT scan and metrizamide CT cisternography in arachnoid cysts of the middle cranial fossa: Classification and pathophysiological aspects. Surg Neurol 1982;17:363–369.
15.
Rekate HL: Classification of slit-ventricle syndromes using intracranial pressure monitoring. Pediatr Neurosurg 1993;19:15–20.
16.
Engel M, Carmel PW, Chutorian AM: Increased intraventricular pressure without ventriculomegaly in children with shunts: ‘Normal volume’ hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 1979;5:549–552.
17.
Oi S, Matsumoto S: Infantile hydrocephalus and the slit ventricle syndrome in early infancy. Childs Nerv Syst 1987;3:145–150.
18.
Albright AL, Tyler-Kabara E: Slit-ventricle syndrome secondary to shunt-induced suture ossification. Neurosurgery 2001;48:764–770.
19.
Ahn Y, Cho BK, Wang KC: Bobble-head doll syndrome associated with subduroperitoneal shunt malfunction. Childs Nerv Syst 1997;13:234–237.
20.
Hayashi N, Endo S, Tsukamoto E, Hohnoki S, Masuoka T, Takaku A: Endoscopic ventriculocystocisternostomy of a quadrigeminal cistern arachnoid cyst. Case report. J Neurosurg 1999;90:1125–1128.
21.
Schroeder HW, Gaab MR, Niendorf WR: Neuroendoscopic approach to arachnoid cysts. J Neurosurg 1996;85:293–298.
22.
Gaston H: Ophthalmic complications of spina bifida and hydrocephalus. Eye 1991;5:279–290.
23.
Bech RA, Juhler M: Unusual clinical manifestations of disturbed CSF dynamics in hydrocephalic children. Childs Nerv Syst 2000;16:446–450.
24.
Baskin JJ, Manwaring KH, Rekate HL: Ventricular shunt removal: The ultimate treatment of the slit ventricle syndrome. J Neurosurg 1998;88:478–484.
© 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel
2002
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.