Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Prediction of Shunt Response in Idiopathic Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus Based on Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Lumbar Infusion

  • Chapter
Intracranial Pressure and Brain Monitoring XV

Part of the book series: Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement ((NEUROCHIRURGICA,volume 122))

Abstract

Background: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring and infusion studies have long been used in the preoperative workup of patients with suspected idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). We have analysed the predictive values of different measures derived from both investigations, emphasising the differences between responders and nonresponders. Materials and methods: ICP monitoring and lumbar infusion studies were routinely performed during a 6-year period. Shunting was proposed when the resistance to cerebrospinal fluid outflow (ROUT) >12 mmHg/ml/min and/or a minimum 15 % of slow waves were detected. The outcome was evaluated 6 months after surgery. Recorded data from ICP monitoring were mean pressure and pulse amplitude, the total percentage of slow waves and the presence of different types of slow waves following the classification proposed by Raftopoulos et al. Recorded data from lumbar infusion studies were mean values of pressure and pulse amplitude during three epochs (basal, early infusion and plateau), ROUT and the pulsatility response to the increase in mean pressure during the infusion. This response was quantified by two pulse amplitude indexes: the pulse amplitude index during the early infusion stage (A1) and the pulse amplitude index during the plateau stage (A2). Results: Thirty shunted patients were evaluated at the end of the follow-up and 23 (76.7 %) of them improved. Differences in the percentage of slow waves, ROUT and both pulsatility indexes were not statistically significant. The proportion of patients with great symmetrical waves and pulse amplitude during the early infusion stage were higher in responders (p < 0.05). The predictive analysis yielded the highest accuracy, with ROUT and A1 as a logical “OR” combination. Conclusion: The combined use of ICP monitoring and lumbar infusion to forecast the response to shunting in patients with suspected iNPH did not improve the accuracy provided by any of them alone.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Anile C, De Bonis P, Albanese A, Di Chirico A, Mangiola A, Petrella G, Santini P (2010) Selection of patients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus for shunt placement: a single-institution experience. J Neurosurg 113:64–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bárcena A, Mestre C, Cañizal JM, Rivero B, Lobato RD (1997) Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: analysis of factors related to cerebrospinal fluid dynamics determining functional prognosis. Acta Neurochir 139:933–941

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Belloni G, di Rocco C, Focacci C, Galli G, Maira G, Rossi GF (1976) Surgical indications in normotensive hydrocephalus. A retrospective analysis of the relations of some diagnostic findings to the results of the surgical treatment. Acta Neurochir 33:1–21

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bering EA Jr (1962) Circulation of the cerebrospinal fluid. Demonstration of the choroid plexuses as the generator of the force for flow of fluid and ventricular enlargement. J Neurosurg 19:405–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Boon AJ, Tans JT, Delwel EJ, Egeler-Peerdeman SM, Hanlo PW, Wurzer HA, Avezaat CJ, de Jong DA, Gooskens RH, Hermans J (1997) Dutch normal-pressure hydrocephalus study: prediction of outcome after shunting by resistance to outflow of cerebrospinal fluid. J Neurosurg 87:687–693

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Borgesen SE, Gjerris F (1982) The predictive value of conductance to outflow of CSF in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Brain 105:65–86

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brean A, Eide PK (2008) Assessment of idiopathic normal pressure patients in neurological practice: the role of lumbar infusion testing for referral of patients to neurosurgery. Eur J Neurol 15:605–612

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Czosnyka Z, Keong N, Kim DJ, Radolovich D, Smielevski P, Lavinio A, Schmidt EA, Momjian S, Owler B, Pickard JD, Czosnyka M (2008) Pulse amplitude of intracranial pressure waveform in hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir Suppl 102:137–140

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Delwel EJ, de Jong DA, Avezaat CJ (2005) The prognostic value of clinical characteristics and parameters of cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics in shunting for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 147:1037–1042

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Di Rocco C, Pettorossi VE, Caldarelli M, Mancinelli R, Velardi F (1978) Communicating hydrocephalus induced by mechanically increased amplitude of the intraventricular cerebrospinal fluid pressure: experimental studies. Exp Neurol 59:40–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Eide PK, Sorteberg W (2010) Diagnostic intracranial pressure monitoring and surgical management in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a 6-year review of 214 patients. Neurosurgery 66:80–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Eide PK, Brean A (2010) Cerebrospinal fluid pulse pressure amplitude during lumbar infusion in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus can predict response to shunting. Cerebrospinal Fluid Res 7:5. doi:10.1186/1743-8454-7-5 [pii]

  13. Eklund A, Smielewski P, Chambers I, Alperin N, Malm J, Czosnyka M, Marmarou A (2007) Assessment of cerebrospinal fluid outflow resistance. Med Bio Eng Comput 45:719–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Foltz EL, Aine C (1981) Diagnosis of hydrocephalus by CSF pulse-wave analysis: a clinical study. Surg Neurol 15:283–293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hakim S, Adams RD (1965) The special clinical problem of symptomatic hydrocephalus with normal cerebrospinal fluid pressure. Observations on cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics. J Neurol Sci 2:307–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Janny P (1950) La pression intra-crânniene chez l’homme. Méthode d’enregistrement – Etude de ses variations et de ses rapports avec les signes cliniques et oftlamologiques. Thesis, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  17. Janny P, Colnet G, Veyre A, Chazal J, Barreto LC (1981) Hydrocéphalie a pression normale. Etude pré- and postoperatoire de 56 cas. Neurochirurgie 27:89–96

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahlon B, Sundbarg G, Rehncrona S (2002) Comparison between the lumbar infusion and CSF tap tests to predict outcome after shunt surgery in suspected normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:721–726

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Katzman R, Hussey F (1970) A simple constant-infusion manometric test for measurement of CSF absorption. I. Rationale and method. Neurology 20:534–544

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Krauss JK, Droste DW, Bohus M, Regel JP, Scheremet R, Riemann D, Seeger W (1995) The relation of intracranial pressure B-waves to different sleep stages in patients with suspected normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir 136:195–203

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Krauss JK, Halve B (2004) Normal pressure hydrocephalus: survey of contemporary algorithms and therapeutic decision-making in clinical practice. Acta Neurochir 146:379–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lamas E, Lobato RD (1979) Intraventricular pressure and CSF dynamics in chronic adult hydrocephalus. Surg Neurol 12:287–295

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lemaire JJ, Chazal J, Gutknecht JL, Picard P, Irthum B, Boire JY (1994) Effects of acute compliance fluctuation on slow ICP waves: frequential aspects. In: Nagai H, Kamiya K, Ishii S (eds) Intracranial pressure IX. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York/Tokyo, pp 184–188

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lundberg N (1960) Continuous recording and control of ventricular fluid pressure in neurosurgical practice. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl 36:1–193

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Malm J, Kristensen B, Karlsson T, Fagerlund M, Elfverson J, Ekstedt J (1995) The predictive value of cerebrospinal fluid dynamic tests in patients with the idiopathic adult hydrocephalus syndrome. Arch Neurol 52:783–789

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Malm J, Eklund A (2006) Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Pract Neurol 6:14–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Marmarou A, Young HF, Aygok GA, Sawauchi S, Tsuji O, Yamamoto T, Dunbar J (2005) Diagnosis and management of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: a prospective study in 151 patients. J Neurosurg 102:987–997

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pickard JD, Matheson M (1980) Intraventricular pressure waves – the best predictive test for shunting in normal pressure hydrocephalus. In: Shulman K, Marmarou A, Miller JD, Becker DP, Hochwald GM, Brock M (eds) Intracranial pressure IV. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 498–500

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Poca MA, Mataro M, Matarin M, Arikan F, Junque C, Sahuquillo J (2004) Is the placement of shunts in patients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus worth the risk? Results of a study based on continuous monitoring of intracranial pressure. J Neurosurg 100:855–866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Qvarlander S, Lundkvist B, Koskinen L-OD, Malm J, Eklund A (2013) Pulsatility in CSF dynamics: pathophysiology of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 84:735–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Raftopoulos C, Chaskis C, Delecluse F, Cantraine F, Bidaut L, Brotchi J (1992) Morphological quantitative analysis of intracranial pressure waves in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurol Res 14:389–396

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Reh DD, Gallia GL, Ramanathan M, Solomon D, Moghekar A, Ishii M, Lane AP (2010) Perioperative continuous cerebrospinal fluid pressure monitoring in patients with spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid leaks: presentation of a novel technique. Am J Rhinol Allergy 24:238–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sahuquillo J, Rubio E, Codina A, Molins A, Guitart JM, Poca MA, Chasampi A (1991) Reappraisal of the intracranial pressure and cerebrospinal fluid dynamics in patients with the so-called “normal pressure hydrocephalus” syndrome. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 112:50–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Symon L, Dorsch NW (1975) Use of long-term intracranial pressure measurement to assess hydrocephalic patients prior to shunt surgery. J Neurosurg 42:258–273

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Woodworth GF, McGirt MJ, Williams MA, Rigamonti D (2009) Cerebrospinal fluid drainage and dynamics in the diagnosis of normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 64:919–926

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Teresa Ek in correcting the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of León, Altos de Nava, s/n, León, 24080, Spain

    David Santamarta, E. González-Martínez, J. Fernández & A. Mostaza

Authors
  1. David Santamarta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. González-Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Mostaza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Santamarta .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, National Neuroscience Institute, Singapore, Singapore

    Beng-Ti Ang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Santamarta, D., González-Martínez, E., Fernández, J., Mostaza, A. (2016). The Prediction of Shunt Response in Idiopathic Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus Based on Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Lumbar Infusion. In: Ang, BT. (eds) Intracranial Pressure and Brain Monitoring XV. Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement, vol 122. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22533-3_53

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22533-3_53

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-22532-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-22533-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation