2005
DOI: 10.1007/s00381-005-1153-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radioisotope shuntograms at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario

Abstract: Approximately one fourth of all shuntograms reported as normal are not (false-negative rate=25%). Review of five other major studies between 1980 and 2003 have reported false-negative rates between 2 and 36%, which may be explained by variations in shuntogram protocols. A standardized method is proposed.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
7
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive values in our study were higher than that reported by Vassilyadi et al [7] who found in their study of 68 shuntograms that sensitivity of shuntograms is 62.9%, specificity 81.1%, accuracy 71.2%, positive predictive value 70.8% and negative predictive value 75%.…”
Section: Using Radionuclide Shuntogram Onlycontrasting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive values in our study were higher than that reported by Vassilyadi et al [7] who found in their study of 68 shuntograms that sensitivity of shuntograms is 62.9%, specificity 81.1%, accuracy 71.2%, positive predictive value 70.8% and negative predictive value 75%.…”
Section: Using Radionuclide Shuntogram Onlycontrasting
confidence: 81%
“…However, Shuntograms have been reported to have falsenegative rates ranging 2-36% [7]. Also it has been observed that sensitivity was increased with CT and CSF shuntogram compared with CT alone [8].…”
Section: Research Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…[7] reported in Table 2. Although all patients are initially lying down when the tracer is being administered, that same position may not be maintained for the duration of the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method also did not analyze the pulsatile nature of CSF flow dynamics and exposed the patient to repeated doses of radiation. 1,4,11,18 MRI techniques allow the study of the pulsatile nature of CSF flow, but they provide data during a single cardiac cycle as opposed to continuous monitoring. Furthermore, MRI continues to be an expensive and time-consuming study that is not well tolerated by many patients due to claustrophobia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%