Hemorrhage associated with ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients on a regimen of dual antiplatelet therapy: a retrospective analysis
Authors: Hudson Joseph S. , Nagahama Yasunori , Nakagawa Daichi , Starke Robert M. , Dlouhy Brian J. , Torner James C. , Jabbour Pascal , Allan Lauren , Derdeyn Colin P. , Greenlee Jeremy D. W. , Hasan David 
Published: November 2017

OBJECTIVEIntracranial stenting and flow diversion require the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to prevent in-stent thrombosis. DAPT may significantly increase the risk of hemorrhagic complications in patients who require subsequent surgical interventions. In this study, the authors sought to investigate whether DAPT is a risk factor for hemorrhagic complications associated with ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt placement in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Moreover, the authors sought to compare VP shunt complication rates with respect to the shunt’s location from the initial external ventricular drain (EVD) site.METHODSPatients with aSAH who presented to the authors’ institution from July 2009 through November 2016 and required VP shunt placement for persistent hydrocephalus were included. The rates of hemorrhagic complications associated with VP shunt placement were compared between patients who were on a regimen of DAPT (aspirin and clopidogrel) for use of a stent or flow diverter, and patients who underwent microsurgical clipping or coiling only and were not on DAPT using a backward stepwise multivariate analysis. Rates of radiographic hemorrhage and infection-related VP shunt revision were compared between patients who underwent VP shunt placement along the same track and those who underwent VP shunt placement at a different site (contralateral or posterior) from the initial EVD.RESULTSA total of 443 patients were admitted for the management of aSAH. Eighty of these patients eventually required VP shunt placement. Thirty-two patients (40%) had been treated with stent-assisted coiling or flow diverters and required DAPT, whereas 48 patients (60%) had been treated with coiling without stents or surgical clipping and were not on DAPT at the time of VP shunt placement. A total of 8 cases (10%) of new hemorrhage were observed along the intracranial proximal catheter of the VP shunt. Seven of these hemorrhages were observed in patients on DAPT, and 1 occurred in a patient not on DAPT. After multivariate analysis, only DAPT was significantly associated with hemorrhage (OR 31.23, 95% CI 2.98–327.32; p = 0.0001). One patient (3%) on DAPT who experienced hemorrhage required shunt revision for hemorrhage-associated proximal catheter blockage. The remaining 7 hemorrhages were clinically insignificant. The difference in rates of hemorrhage between shunt placement along the same track and placement at a different site of 0.07 was not significant (6/47 vs 2/32, p = 0.46). The difference in infection-related VP shunt revision rate was not significantly different (1/47 vs 3/32, p = 0.2978).CONCLUSIONSThis clinical series confirms that, in patients with ruptured aneurysms who are candidates for stent-assisted coiling or flow diversion, the risk of clinically significant VP shunt–associated hemorrhage with DAPT is low. In an era of evolving endovascular therapeutics, stenting or flow diversion is a viable option in select aSAH patients.