Relative Position of the Third Characteristic Peak of the Intracranial Pressure Pulse Waveform Morphology Differentiates Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus Shunt Responders and Nonresponders

  • Robert Hamilton
  • Jennifer Fuller
  • Kevin Baldwin
  • Paul Vespa
  • Xiao HuEmail author
  • Marvin Bergsneider
Part of the Acta Neurochirurgica Supplement book series (NEUROCHIRURGICA, volume 122)


Introduction: The diversion of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) remains the principal treatment option for patients with normal-pressure hydrocephalus (NPH). External lumbar drain (ELD) and overnight intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring are popular prognostic tests for differentiating which patients will benefit from shunting. Using the morphological clustering and analysis of continuous intracranial pulse (MOCAIP) algorithm to extract morphological metrics from the overnight ICP signal, we hypothesize that changes in the third peak of the ICP pulse pressure waveform can be used to differentiate ELD responders and nonresponders. Materials and Methods: Our study involved 66 patients (72.2 ± 9.8 years) undergoing evaluation for possible NPH, which included overnight ICP monitoring and ELD. ELD outcome was based on clinical notes and divided into nonresponders and responders. MOCAIP was used to extract mean ICP, ICP wave amplitude (waveAmp), and a metric derived to study P3 elevation (P3ratio). Results: Of the 66 patients, 7 were classified as nonresponders and 25 as significant responders. The mean ICP and waveAmp did not vary significantly (p = 0.19 and p = 0.41) between the outcome groups; however, the P3ratio did show a significant difference (p = 0.04). Conclusion: Initial results suggest that the P3ratio might be used as a prognostic indicator for ELD outcome.


Intracranial pressure Normal-pressure hydrocephalus Waveform morphology Shunt response Pulse pressure waveform External lumbar drain 



The present work was partially supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) NS059797, NS054881, and NS066008.

Conflict of Interest

No conflicts of interest to report for this work.


  1. 1.
    Du Boulay G, O’Connell J, Currie J, Bostick T, Verity P (1972) Further investigations on pulsatile movements in the cerebrospinal fluid pathways. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 13:496–523Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eide PK, Sorteberg W (2009) Diagnostic intracranial pressure monitoring and surgical management in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a 6-year review of 214 patients. Neurosurgery 66:80–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Graff-Radford NR, Rezai K, Godersky JC, Eslinger P, Damasio H, Kirchner PT (1987) Regional cerebral blood flow in normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 50:1589–1596CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greitz T (1969) Cerebral blood flow in occult hydrocephalus studied with angiography and the xenon 133 clearance method. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 8:376–384Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    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 2:307–327CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hayashi M, Kobayashi H, Kawano H, Yamamoto S, Maeda T (1984) Cerebral blood flow and ICP patterns in patients with communicating hydrocephalus after aneurysm rupture. J Neurosurg 61:30–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu X, Xu P, Scalzo F, Vespa P, Bergsneider M (2009) Morphological clustering and analysis of continuous intracranial pressure. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 56:696–705CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu X, Glenn T, Scalzo F, Bergsneider M, Sarkiss C, Martin N, Vespa P (2010) Intracranial pressure pulse morphological features improved detection of decreased cerebral blood flow. Physiol Meas 31:679–695CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hu X, Hamilton R, Baldwin K, Vespa P, Bergsneider M (2012) Automated extraction of decision rules for predicting lumbar drain outcome by analyzing overnight intracranial pressure. Acta Neurochir Suppl 114:207–212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klinge PM, Berding G, Brinker T, Knapp WH, Samii M (1999) A positron emission tomography study of cerebrovascular reserve before and after shunt surgery in patients with idiopathic chronic hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg 91:605–609CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lundberg N (1960) Continuous recording and control of ventricular fluid pressure in neurosurgical practice. Acta Psychiatr Scand 36:1–193Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maeder P, de Tribolet N (1995) Xenon CT measurement of cerebral blood flow in hydrocephalus. Childs Nerv Syst 11:388–391CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marmarou A, Bergsneider M, Klinge P, Relkin N, Black PM (2005) The value of supplemental prognostic tests for the preoperative assessment of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 57:S17–S28; discussion ii–vCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    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 14:389–396PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stephensen H, Andersson N, Eklund A, Malm J, Tisell M, Wikkelso C (2005) Objective B wave analysis in 55 patients with non-communicating and communicating hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 76:965–970CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Symon L, Dorsch NW (1975) Use of long-term intracranial pressure measurement to assess hydrocephalic patients prior to shunt surgery. J Neurosurg 42:258–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tanaka A, Kimura M, Nakayama Y, Yoshinaga S, Tomonaga M (1997) Cerebral blood flow and autoregulation in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 40:1161–1165; discussion 1165–1167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Waldemar G, Schmidt JF, Delecluse F, Andersen AR, Gjerris F, Paulson OB (1993) High resolution SPECT with [99mTc]-d, l-HMPAO in normal pressure hydrocephalus before and after shunt operation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 56:655–664CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Woodworth GF, McGirt MJ, Williams MA, Rigamonti D (2009) Cerebrospinal fluid drainage and dynamics in the diagnosis of normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 64:919–925; discussion 925–926CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Hamilton
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jennifer Fuller
    • 3
  • Kevin Baldwin
    • 1
  • Paul Vespa
    • 1
    • 3
  • Xiao Hu
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Marvin Bergsneider
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Neural Systems and Dynamics Laboratory, Department of NeurosurgeryThe David Geffen School of Medicine, University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Biomedical Engineering Graduate ProgramHenry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.The David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California-Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations