| Literature DB >> 25948879 |
Meng-Hsiang Chen1, Cheng-Hsien Lu2, Hung-Chen Wang3, Hsiu-Ling Chen4, Nai-Wen Tsai5, Shau-Hsuan Li6, Nai-Wen Hsu7, Wei-Ming Lin8, Chia-Te Kung9, Wei-Che Lin1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hydrocephalus in cryptococcal meningoencephalitis is most commonly managed with a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. This study applied cine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate initial disease severity on long-term cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) flow dynamics and associated neuropsychological sequelae in cryptococcal meningoencephalitis patients with and without ventriculoperitoneal shunts.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25948879 PMCID: PMC4407401 DOI: 10.1155/2015/356476
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Neurol ISSN: 0953-4180 Impact factor: 3.342
Figure 1The original phase contrast imaging is shown in (a) and amplified in (b). The ROIs were placed manually to circulate through the whole aqueduct. The control reference of periaqueductal brain parenchymal matter is shown in (c) as a “C-shape” circulation area that avoided the basilar-vertebral vessel system.
Demographic data of cryptococcal meningitis patients and controls.
| Demographics | Patients with shunts | Patients without shunts | Normal |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female) | 9/1 | 7/1 | 28/4 | 0.022 | 0.978 |
| Age at follow-up | 53.70 ± 14.30 | 54.00 ± 9.87 | 51.47 ± 13.30 | 0.190 | 0.827 |
| Education | 9.30 ± 5.46 | 10.63 ± 4.63 | 12.56 ± 4.22 | 2.184 | 0.124 |
| Duration of follow-up (months)a | 73.5 (21.25, 113.25) | 116 (38.5, 130.75) | — | −1.289 | 0.197 |
| Hospitalization duration (days)a | 53 (33.5, 60.5) | 25 (17, 43) | — | −2.398 |
|
| Glasgow Coma Scale at admissiona | 15 (13.75, 15) | 15 (14, 15) | — | −0.304 | 0.761 |
| Glasgow Coma Scale at dischargea | 15 (13.75, 15) | 15 (15, 15) | — | −0.853 | 0.394 |
| CSF Cryptococcal Ag titer at admissiona | 1024 (320, 1536) | 384 (96.5, 2816) | — | −0.842 | 0.400 |
| Max CSF Cryptococcal Ag titer during hospitalizationa | 1024 (320, 2560) | 1024 (96.5, 2816) | — | −0.311 | 0.756 |
| CSF white cell count (/mm3)a | 10 (43.75, 400.5) | 152 (40.5, 290) | — | −0.245 | 0.806 |
| CSF protein at admission (g/L)a | 201.5 (96.75, 355.43) | 156 (91.6, 189) | — | −1.073 | 0.283 |
| CSF protein max during hospitalization (g/L)a | 210.4 (130.5, 504) | 169.5 (91.6, 317) | — | −1.429 | 0.153 |
| CSF lactate at admission (mmol/L)a | 28.6 (22.85, 52.175) | 18.1 (9.1, 24) | — | −2.197 |
|
| CSF lactate max during hospitalization (mmol/L)a | 41.7 (29.9, 75.4) | 24 (20.1, 51.8) | — | −2.064 |
|
| CSF glucose at admission (mmol/L)a | 45.5 (18.25, 58.75) | 36 (22, 49) | — | −0.976 | 0.329 |
| CSF glucose max during hospitalization (mmol/L)a | 48 (30.5, 125.5) | 53 (25, 70) | — | −0.582 | 0.560 |
| Serum sodium (mmol/L) | 138.90 ± 3.76 | 137.86 ± 2.55 | — | 0.446 | 0.516 |
| Creatinine level at discharge ( | 1.0867 ± 0.27 | 1.22 ± 0.33 | — | 1.125 | 0.312 |
| Evan ratio in admission | 27.11 ± 3.04 | 27.96 ± 5.34 | — | 0.065 | 0.802 |
| Evan ratio in follow-up | 27.13 ± 2.86 | 26.12 ± 2.52 | — | 0.877 | 0.365 |
aNonparametric independent samples test was used for the non-Gaussian distribution of data. Bold-faced values represent significant differences between groups (P ≤ 0.05).
Neuroimaging findings of the patients in the acute stage and at follow-up.
| Patient number | Antigen titer | Acute MRI finding | MRI f/u finding | Image f/u interval (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patients with shunts | ||||
| 1 | 1 : 1024 | Meningeal enhancement, mild | Meningeal enhancement, progression | 4 |
| 2 | 1 : 1024+ | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Dilated lateral left frontal ventricle | 98 |
| 3 | 1 : 512 | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Meningeal enhancement, regressive change | 24 |
| 4 | 1 : 1024 | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | 13 |
| 5 | Negative | Dilated bilateral ventricles (CT) | Hyperintensities over bilateral frontoparietal area | 124 |
| 6 | >1 : 1024 | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Complete regression | 50 |
| 7 | 1 : 128 | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Dilated lateral ventricles | 35 |
| 8 | Negative | Prominent ventricles | Complete regression | 111 |
| 9 | 1 : 8 | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | Meningeal enhancement, diffuse | 120 |
| 10 | 1 : 2048 | Hyperintensity over left frontoparietal area | Complete regression | 97 |
|
| ||||
| Patients without shunts | ||||
| 11 | 1 : 8+ | VR dilatation, bilateral | Complete regression | 117 |
| 12 | 1 : 8 | No active lesion | No active lesion | 132 |
| 13 | 1 : 256+ | No active lesion | No active lesion | 97 |
| 14 | Negative | No active lesion (CT) | No active lesion | 115 |
| 15 | 1 : 128 | Meningeal enhancement over posterior fossa and perivascular space of supratentorium, | Complete regression | 12 |
| 16 | None | No active lesion (CT) | No active lesion | 127 |
| 17 | 1 : 256 | Meningeal enhancement over | Dilated lateral ventricles | 19 |
| 18 | Negative | No active lesion (CT) | Dilated lateral ventricles | 168 |
Neuropsychological rating scores among groups.
| Neuropsychological tests | All patients | Patients with shunts | Patients without shunts | Normal |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III | ||||||||
| Information | 9.06 ± 2.46 | 9.33 ± 2.00 | 8.75 ± 3.01 | 11.18 ± 2.85 | 2.810 | 0.101 | 2.239 | 0.119 |
| Vocabulary | 9.47 ± 3.36# | 8.44 ± 3.21§ | 10.62 ± 2.82 | 12.06 ± 2.79#§ | 4.057 |
| 3.131 | 0.054 |
| Similarity | 8.41 ± 3.69# | 7.55 ± 3.04§ | 9.37 ± 4.30 | 11.50 ± 2.03#§ | 10.059 |
| 6.153 |
|
| Comprehension | 8.94 ± 3.83# | 8.33 ± 3.50 | 9.62 ± 4.30 | 11.96 ± 3.08# | 4.946 |
| 2.618 | 0.085 |
| Arithmetic | 9.41 ± 3.14 | 9.33 ± 2.91 | 9.50 ± 3.58 | 10.96 ± 2.49 | 1.785 | 0.188 | 0.875 | 0.424 |
| Digit span | 8.71 ± 3.16# | 8.33 ± 3.96 | 9.12 ± 2.10 | 12.28 ± 3.64# | 7.019 |
| 3.471 |
|
| Letter-number sequencing | 7.88 ± 4.61 | 8.11 ± 4.22 | 7.62 ± 5.23 | 10.68 ± 3.55 | 3.156 | 0.085 | 1.606 | 0.216 |
| Picture complete | 8.06 ± 2.66# | 7.66 ± 2.00 | 8.50 ± 3.33 | 10.53 ± 2.89# | 6.549 |
| 3.481 |
|
| Block design | 8.47 ± 3.83# | 8.77 ± 3.52 | 8.12 ± 4.35 | 11.90 ± 3.10# | 9.280 |
| 4.772 |
|
| Matrix reasoning | 8.94 ± 2.97 | 9.00 ± 2.64 | 8.87 ± 3.48 | 10.81 ± 3.51 | 1.085 | 0.303 | 0.594 | 0.556 |
| Digit symbol coding | 8.06 ± 3.58# | 7.55 ± 2.50§ | 8.62 ± 4.62 | 11.53 ± 2.67#§ | 9.507 |
| 4.809 |
|
| Picture arrangement | 8.71 ± 3.31 | 9.11 ± 3.14 | 8.25 ± 3.65 | 10.65 ± 2.96 | 1.709 | 0.198 | 1.262 | 0.293 |
|
| ||||||||
| Cognitive Ability Screening Instrument | ||||||||
| Attention | 7.23 ± 1.09 | 6.77 ± 1.37§& | 7.75 ± 0.46& | 7.84 ± 0.44§ | 3.870 | 0.055 | 6.475 |
|
| Orientation | 15.88 ± 3.69# | 16.55 ± 3.24 | 15.12 ± 4.22 | 17.71 ± 0.77# | 4.076 |
| 3.413 |
|
| Abstract thinking | 9.35 ± 2.32# | 8.88 ± 2.20 | 9.87 ± 2.47 | 10.78 ± 1.26# | 4.560 |
| 2.889 | 0.067 |
| Mental Manipulation | 8.41 ± 1.80# | 8.44 ± 1.42 | 8.37 ± 2.26 | 9.31 ± 1.17# | 4.174 |
| 2.042 | 0.142 |
| Short-term memory | 8.48 ± 3.33# | 8.85 ± 3.36 | 8.06 ± 3.47 | 10.71 ± 1.76# | 5.49 |
| 3.376 |
|
| Long-term memory | 9.65 ± 0.79 | 9.77 ± 0.66 | 9.50 ± 0.92 | 9.93 ± 0.35 | 1.426 | 0.239 | 1.606 | 0.212 |
| Language | 9.73 ± 0.50 | 9.60 ± 0.59 | 9.87 ± 0.35 | 9.85 ± 0.54 | 0.506 | 0.481 | 1.308 | 0.281 |
| Semantic fluency | 6.94 ± 2.75# | 6.66 ± 3.20 | 7.25 ± 2.31 | 8.93 ± 1.47# | 5.835 |
| 2.869 | 0.068 |
| Drawing | 9.06 ± 1.60 | 8.77 ± 1.78 | 9.37 ± 1.40 | 9.81 ± 0.592 | 3.828 | 0.057 | 2.606 | 0.085 |
| Total score | 84.74 ± 14.51# | 84.34 ± 14.73 | 85.18 ± 15.24 | 94.91 ± 4.74# | 8.945 |
| 4.377 |
|
F 1 and P 1 represent comparison between all patients and the controls.
F 2 and P 2 represent comparison among the patients with/without shunts and controls.
#Significant difference between all patients and the controls.
§Significant difference between the patients with shunts and controls.
Significant difference between the patients without shunts and controls.
&Significant difference between the patients with and without shunts.
Bold-faced values represent significant differences (P ≤ 0.05).
Figure 2Cine MRI parameters of patients with and without shunts as compared with healthy controls. §Significant difference between the patients with shunts and controls. Significant difference between the patients without shunts and controls (P < 0.05).
Figure 3The MR imaging in (a) the acute stage and (b) at follow-up for a 27-year-old male who received a shunt and had a follow-up duration of 98 months showed no interval changes in ventricular size. (c) CSF flow patterns at follow-up showed normal wave form but a smaller longitudinal scale. The MR imaging in (d) the acute stage and (e) at follow-up for a 45-year-old male without a shunt procedure and with a follow-up duration of 97 months showed a mildly increased ventricular size. His CSF flow pattern (f) shows a more extremely increased AF than that of either the controls or the patients without shunts.