This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JOHN B. NEWKIRK, DSc
Evergreen, Colo

Arch Surg. 1987;122(5):619.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—The title, the bulk of the text, and the conclusions of a recent article by Fulenwider et al¹ imply that their study applies to the double-as well as to the single-valve Denver peritoneovenous shunt. However, only single-valve Denver shunts were included in the nine-unit series. It is commonly known that double-valve Denver shunts are preferred for the vast majority of shunting candidates, and the single-valve type is recommended only when very viscous ascitic fluid is encountered. Since the double-valve type was commercially available at the time of the Fulenwider series, it is not clear why single- instead of double-valve shunts were tested if the series had to be restricted to one type.

A major beneficial feature of the Denver device was apparently not utilized during the management of the patients in this series. There is no indication in the article that the Denver shunt was regularly . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?