Background: Pneumococcal shunt infection is a rare event. There is no consensus on the therapeutic management of this kind of shunt infection according to literature reviews, and it seems to be different from infection with Staphylococcus epidermidis. We studied 2 shunted patients with pneumococcal meningitis, both of whom were treated with only antibiotics. The management of these cases seems to be different from that of shunt catheter infection due to these bacteria. We conducted a laboratory study to show the different behavior of pneumococcus compared to S. epidermidis regarding shunt catheter colonization. Materials and Methods:S. epidermidis and Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria isolated from the cerebrospinal fluid of meningitis patients were incubated in sterile media. Forty-five segments of shunt catheter from silicone material were placed in 45 separate media of S. epidermidis and pneumococcus. Then each catheter was washed and cultured in blood chocolate agar growth medium in separate petri dishes via the roll plate method. The dishes were extracted from the incubator and the colony count was calculated after 72 h. Results: The colony count was obviously different between the 2 bacteria groups, with a higher count related to S. epidermidis dishes. The colony count of the pneumococcal petri dishes was 25-35,000 (mean 14,337) and for dishes with S. epidermidis it was 14,000-100,000 (mean 50,125) (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The adherence of pneumococcus to shunt catheters seems to be much less than that of S. epidermidis, which produced a very low colony count when incubated with the catheter in the medium culture. S. pneumoniae meningitis in shunted patients can be managed successfully with only antibiotics. This approach can prevent problems related to the several additional surgeries required for shunt removal, a new shunt insertion, and the management of high intracranial pressure.

1.
Milhoral TH: Hydrocephalus: pathophysiology and clinical features; in Wilkins RH, Rengachary SS (eds): Neurosurgery, ed 2. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1996, pp 3625-3631.
2.
Pattisapu JV: Etiology and clinical course of hydrocephalus. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2001;12:651-659.
3.
Li V: Methods and complications in surgical cerebrospinal fluid shunting. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2001;12:685-693.
4.
Kontry U, Höfling B, Gutgahr P, Voth P, Schwarz M, Schmitt HJ: CSF shunt infections in children. Infection 1993;21(suppl 2):89-92.
5.
Quigley MR, Reigel DH, Kortyna R: Cerebrospinal fluid shunt infections. Pediatr Neurosci 1989;15:111-120.
6.
Schreffler RT, Schreffler AJ, Wittler RR: Treatment of cerebrospinal fluid shunt infections: a decision analysis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002;21:632-636.
7.
Orvin K, Bilavsky E, Weiner E, Shouval DS, Amir J: Successful antibiotic eradication of Streptococcus pneumoniae infection of a ventriculoatrial shunt. Int J Infect Dis 2009;13:e101-e103.
8.
Blount JP, Campbell JA, Haines SJ: Complications in ventricular cerebrospinal fluid shunting. Neurosurg Clin N Am 1993;4:633-656.
9.
Chadduck W, Adametz J: Incidence of seizures in patients with myelomeningocele: a multifactorial analysis. Surg Neurol 1988;30:281-285.
10.
Chapman PH, Borges LF. Shunt infections: prevention and treatment. Clin Neurosurg 1985;32:652-664.
11.
Fan-Havard P, Nahata MC: Treatment and prevention of infections of cerebrospinal fluid shunts. Clin Pharm 1987;6:866-880.
12.
Govender ST, Nathoo N, van Dellen JR: Evaluation of an antibiotic-impregnated shunt system for the treatment of hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 2003;99:831-839.
13.
McGirt MJ, Leveque JC, Wellons JC III, Villavicencio AT, Hopkins JS, Fuchs HE: Cerebrospinal fluid shunt survival and etiology of failures: a seven-year institutional experience. Pediatr Neurosurg 2002;36:248-255.
14.
Walters BC, Goumnerova L, Hoffman HJ, Hendrick EB, Humphreys RP, Levinton C: A randomized controlled trial of perioperative rifampin/trimethoprim in cerebrospinal fluid shunt surgery. Childs Nerv Syst 1992;8:253-257.
15.
Walters BC, Hoffman HJ, Hendrick EB, Humphreys RP: Cerebrospinal fluid shunt infection: influences on initial management and subsequent outcome. J Neurosurg 1984;60:1014-1021.
16.
Smith ER, Butler WE, Barker FG II: In-hospital mortality rates after ventriculoperitoneal shunt procedures in the United States, 1998 to 2000: relation to hospital and surgeon volume of care. J Neurosurg 2004;100:90-97.
17.
Davis SE, Levy ML, McComb JG, Masri-Lavine L: Does age or other factors influence the incidence of ventriculoperitoneal shunt infections? Pediatr Neurosurg 1999;30:253-257.
18.
Odio C, McCracken GH, Jr, Nelson JD: CSF shunt infections in pediatrics: a seven-year experience. Am J Dis Child 1984;138:1103-1108.
19.
Gardner P, Leipzig T, Phillips P: Infections of central nervous system shunts. Med Clin North Am 1985;69:297-314.
20.
Tunkel AR, Kaufman BA: Cerebrospinal fluid shunt infection; in Mandell GL, Bennetts JE, Dolen R (eds): Principles and practice of infectious diseases, ed 6. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 2004, pp 1126-1132.
21.
O'Keeffe PT, Bayston R: Pneumococcal meningitis in a child with a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt. J Infect 1991;22:77-79.
22.
Livni G, Yuhas Y, Ashkenazi S, Michowiz S: In vitro bacterial adherence to ventriculoperitoneal shunts. Pediatr Neurosurg 2004;40:64-69.
23.
Otto M: Staphylococcus epidermidis: the ‘accidental' pathogen. Nat Rev Microbiol 2009;7:555-567.
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.