Abstract
Ventriculo-peritoneal shunts (VPS) are commonly used in the treatment of various neurosurgical conditions, including hydrocephalus and pseudotumor cerebri. We report only the second case of vaginal extrusion of a VPS catheter in an adult, and the first case with a modern VPS silastic peritoneal catheter. A 45-year-old female with a history of VPS for pseudotumor cerebri, Behcet's syndrome, and hysterectomy presented to our institution with the chief complaint of tubing protruding from her vagina after urination. On gynecologic examination, the patient was found to have approximately 15 cm of VPS catheter protruding from her vaginal apex. A computed tomography scan of the abdomen and shunt X-ray series demonstrated no breaks in the tubing, but also confirmed the finding of the VPS catheter extruding through the vaginal cuff into the vagina. The patient had the VPS removed and an external ventricular drain was placed for temporary cerebrospinal fluid diversion. Ventricular catheter cultures were positive for diphtheroids. After an appropriate course of antibiotics, a contralateral ventriculo-pleural shunt was placed one week later. Although vary rare, vaginal extrusion can occur in adults, even with modern VPS catheters.
Copyright
Association for Helping Neurosurgical Sick People. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Derivative-Non Commercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit.
Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
