Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Institute
- Medizin (1)
Säuger
(1995)
Die vielfältige Biotopausstattung der unteren Havelniederung, insbesondere ihre ausgedehnten Verlandungszonen und Überschwemmungsflächen aber auch die Flurgehölze, Kleingewässer und Fließe in den eingedeichten Bereichen, bieten 51 Säugetierarten Lebensraum. Das sind 78 % der in Sachsen-Anhalt nachgewiesenen Arten. Davon ist ein hoher Anteil nach der Roten Liste des Landes Sachsen- Anhalt als gefährdet, stark gefährdet oder vom Aussterben bedroht eingestuft (Tab. 2). Diese Tatsache belegt eindrucksvoll den Refugialcharakter der unteren Havelniederung.
56 spider species have been recorded in a 4-hours-fieldtrip. Twelve of them are endangered according to the red data book for spiders in Germany. Some interesting species are mentioned with comments on their habitat preference and distribution limits. Figures of two species (Theridion nigrovariegatum, Dipoena erythropus) are given because of variation in their genitalia.
Background: The most frequent therapy of hydrocephalus is the implantation of ventriculoperitoneal shunts for diverting cerebrospinal fluid from the ventricles into the peritoneum. We compared two adjustable valves, the proGAV and proGAV 2.0, for complications which resulted in revision operations.
Methods: Four hundred patients who underwent primary shunt implantation between 2014 and 2020 were analyzed for overall revision rate, one-year revision rate, revision free survival and overall survival observing patient age group, gender, etiology of hydrocephalus, implantation site, prior diversion of cerebrospinal fluid and cause of revision.
Results: All data were available of all 400 patients (female/male 208/192). Overall, 99 patients underwent revision surgery after primary implantation. ProGAV valve was implanted in 283 patients, proGAV 2.0 in 117 patients. There was no significant difference between the two shunt valves concerning revision rate (p=0.8069), one-year revision rate (p=0.9077), revision free survival (p=0.6921) and overall survival (p=0.3232). Furthermore, regarding one-year revision rate, we observed no significant difference between the two shunt valves in pediatric patients (40.7% vs 27.6%; p=0.2247). Revision operation had to be performed more frequently in pediatric patients (46.6% vs 24.8%; p=0.0093) with a significant higher number of total revisions with proGAV than proGAV 2.0 (55.9% vs. 27.6%; p=0.0110) most likely due to longer follow up in the proGAV -group.
Conclusion: According to the target variables we analyzed, aside from lifetime revision rate in pediatric patients there is no significant difference between the two shunt valves. From our subjective point of view, implantation of the newer proGAV 2.0 valve is preferable due to higher adjustment comfort for both patients and physicians.