| Literature DB >> 22239832 |
Masatsune Ishikawa1, Masaaki Hashimoto, Etsuro Mori, Nobumasa Kuwana, Hiroaki Kazui.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tap test (TT) has been regarded as an important test for the prediction of shunt effectiveness in patients with suspected idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH). Although its specificity and sensitivity are reportedly high, there remains some disagreement over this point. Herein, the TT as a test for predicting shunt effectiveness was investigated in our multicenter prospective study named SINPHONI and strategies to increase its predictability were examined.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22239832 PMCID: PMC3293050 DOI: 10.1186/2045-8118-9-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Fluids Barriers CNS ISSN: 2045-8118
Baseline characteristics in shunt responders and non-responders measured before tap test.
| Variables | responders (IQR) | non-responders(IQR) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Number of patients | 80 | 20 | |
| 2 | Male/Female | 44/36 | 14/6 | NS |
| 3 | Age (years)* | 75(71-78) | 75(71.2-78.5) | NS |
| 4 | Evans index (%)* | 35(33-38) | 34.6(32.7-38) | NS |
| 5 | CSFP(cmH20)* | 13(9-15) | 12(8-12.8) | < 0.05 |
| 6 | GS-Gait-pre* | 2(2-3) | 2(2-3) | NS |
| 7 | GS-Cogn-pre* | 2(1-3) | 2(1-3.7) | NS |
| 8 | GS-Urin-pre* | 2(1-3.7) | 2.1(1.4) | NS |
| 9 | GS-Total-pre* | 6(4-9.7) | 6(4-9.2) | NS |
| 10 | TUG-pre (sec)* | 19.5(15-26.7) | 20(18.2-27) | NS |
| 11 | MMSE-pre* | 22.5(15-25.7) | 25(18.2-27) | NS |
| 12 | SAE (patient numbers) | 7 | 8 | < 0.005 |
| Pneumonia | 0 | 3 | ||
| Malignancy | 1 | 1 | ||
| Vascular events | 3 | 1 | ||
| Subdural effusion | 1 | 0 | ||
| Surgery-related** | 0 | 2 | ||
| Femoral fracture | 2 | 1 | ||
Abbreviations: IQR: interquartile range, CSFP: cerebrospinal fluid pressure at lumbar tap, GS-Gait-pre: iNPH grading scale for gait pre tap test, GS-Cogn-pre: iNPH grading scale for cognition pre tap test, GS-Urin-pre: iNPH grading scale for urinary function pre tap test, GS-Total-pre: sum of three grading scales, p:probability, TUG-pre: timed up-and-go test, MMSE: Mini-Mental State Examination, SAE: severe adverse events. *: median (25% and 75% IQR),:**: shunt malfunction and bowel injury
Numbers of patients, sensitivity and specificity for each of variables examined.
| Variables | TP | TN | FP | FN | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GS-Gait-change | 41 | 16 | 4 | 39 | 51.3 | 80.0 |
| 2 | GS-Cogn-change | 20 | 17 | 3 | 60 | 25.0 | 85.0 |
| 3 | GS-Urin-change | 30 | 17 | 3 | 50 | 37.5 | 85.0 |
| 4 | GS-Total-change | 57 | 13 | 7 | 23 | 71.3 | 65.0 |
| 5 | TUG ≥ 10% (sec)1 | 26 | 14 | 5 | 50 | 34.2 | 73.6 |
| 6 | MMSE ≥ 3 | 51 | 6 | 14 | 29 | 63.8 | 30.0 |
| 7 | Tap-any | 74 | 4 | 16 | 6 | 92.5 | 20.0 |
| 8 | GS-Total-change, CSFP ≥ 15 cmH2O2 | 66 | 13 | 7 | 14 | 82.5 | 65.0 |
Abbreviations: TP: true positives, TN: true negatives, FP: false positives, FN: false negatives (), GS-Gait-change: grading scale gait change 1-2 days after CSF tap, GS-Cogn-change: grading scale cognition change 7 days after tap, GS-Urin-change: grading scale urinary change 7 days after tap, GS-total change: sum of change for all three grading scales, TUG ≥ 10%: ≥ 10% improvement in timed-up -and-go test, MMSE ≥ 3: improvement of 3 or more points on the Mini-Mental State Examination score 7 days after tap, Tap-any: Calculated from improvement in any of the iNPHGS, TUG or MMSE. 1: N = 95 patients, 2: calculated from decision tree analysis.
Figure 1Decision tree analysis for selecting shunt responders. At the first step, 57 shunt responders (SR) among 64 patients with improvement of any domain in iNPHGS [GS-Total-change (+)] group were selected as positive cases. At the second step, nine SR were selected from the 36 patients without improvement in iNPHGS [GS-Total-change (-)] group with the variable of CSFP greater than 15 cm H20. This resulted in 82.5% of 80 SR patients being identified in two steps.