Endoscopic third ventriculostomy versus ventriculoperitoneal shunt in patients of hydrocephalus in eastern India: A prospective observational study

Background: Hydrocephalus is a disorder of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) physiology, resulting in an abnormal enlargement of the ventricles due to excessive accumulation of CSF. Although neurosurgical treatment has evolved over time with ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) as the standard of care, procedure-related complications and poor long-term cognitive and motor milestone outcomes are still considerable, justifying the need for safer alternatives. Endoscopic third ventriculostomy (ETV) has emerged as a promising prospect especially in non-communicating hydrocephalus (NCH). Aims and Objectives: To compare the beneficial effects of ETV versus ventriculoperitoneal shunt in patients of NCH. Materials and Methods: The present prospective study was conducted at the Department of Neurosurgery, Bangur Institute of Neurosciences, IPGMER and SSKM Hospital, Kolkata from July 2021 to December 2022 among 60 patients admitted with NCH. Out of 60 patients; 30 patients underwent ETV and the remaining 30 patients VP shunting. All included patients had their history taken and relevant clinical and radiological examination done pre-operatively. They were discharged on the third post-operative day or later depending on their clinical condition and recovery. Results: Aqueductal stenosis was the most common etiology for NCH in both the groups. Post-intervention, complications and reoperation rate were reported more in VP group as compared to ETV group. Overall 3 subjects died, out of which 2 belonged to VP group and 1 to ETV group. Success was found in 70% and 86.67% of the subjects in VP and ETV group respectively. Conclusion: In patients with non-communicating or obstructive hydrocephalus, ETV was reported to be superior to VPS in terms of reoperation and complication rate at 4th, 12th, and 24th weeks after the treatment

A comparative and prospective study of surgical outcomes of cervical artificial disc to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease of cervical spine in a tertiary care center of Eastern India

Background: Cervical disc degeneration is known to be a primary cause of neck pain and neurologic symptoms and can cause significant morbidity. Degeneration can be related to radiculopathy or myelopathy due to compression of spinal nerves and/or spinal cord. Disc pathology may manifest clinically as localized and radicular pain, myelopathy, and spinal joint instability. If severe, such as in degenerative disc disease, infections, and trauma, surgical methods are indicated. Some studies reported that compared to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), cervical artificial disc (CAD) could provide better neurological outcomes and reduce the rate of adjacent segment degeneration, whereas other studies reported no difference between the two procedures. Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes of CAD to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic degenerative disc disease in cervical spine. Materials and Methods: It was a comparative study with prospective design conducted among 40 symptomatic cervical disc degenerative disease patients (20 patients undergoing CAD and the remaining 20 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion) at the Department of Neurosurgery, Bangur Institute of Neurosciences, 1PGMER and SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, from January 2021 to December 2022. Respective surgical procedures were done. All patients were required to return for follow-up. Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed at 1 month, 3 months, 1 year, postoperatively, and last follow-up (more than 18 months). Clinical effectiveness was evaluated by the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score (17 points system, 1994 revised edition), and neck disability index (NDI) score. Results: Improvement in NDI, VAS, and JOA index was found to be more in CAD as compared to ACDF group with a statistically significant difference as P0.05. Conclusion: The findings of the present study support the superior longevity and better outcome of CDA, as compared with ACDF, with regard to need for subsequent surgical intervention and also support better improvement in symptoms in subsequent follow-up in patients undergoing CDA as compared to ACDF despite having comparable mean operative time and blood loss