2014
DOI: 10.1007/s12028-013-9946-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Risk Factors Associated with Infections and Need for Permanent Cerebrospinal Fluid Diversion in Pediatric Intensive Care Patients with Externalized Ventricular Drains

Abstract: Introduction Externalized ventricular drains (EVDs) are commonly used in pediatric intensive care units (PICU) but few data are available regarding infection rates, infection risks, or factors associated with conversion to permanent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion. Methods Retrospective observational study of patients managed with EVDs admitted to a tertiary care PICU from January 2005 to December 2009 Results Three hundred eighty patients were identified. Neurologic diagnostic groups were externalizat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
19
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
19
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This dataset was previously published evaluating the association of EVDs and infection (15). This study was approved by the hospital Institutional Review Board and the requirement for obtaining informed consent was waived.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This dataset was previously published evaluating the association of EVDs and infection (15). This study was approved by the hospital Institutional Review Board and the requirement for obtaining informed consent was waived.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In comparison to our previously published cohort, the infection rate with antibiotic-impregnated EVDs is significantly lower than nonantibiotic-impregnated EVDs (0.9% vs 6%, p = 0.00128). 15…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A z-test for differences in two proportions was used to assess the difference in positive culture rate between the current study and the previously published study (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)). 15…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations