Rubén Martín-Láez1, Hugo Caballero-Arzapalo2, Natalia Valle-San Román3, Luis Ángel López-Menéndez2, Juan Carlos Arango-Lasprilla4, Alfonso Vázquez-Barquero2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery-Spine Unit, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Santander, Spain. Electronic address: rmlaez@yahoo.es. 2. Department of Neurosurgery-Spine Unit, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Santander, Spain. 3. Section of Neuroradiology, University Hospital "Marqués de Valdecilla", Santander, Spain. 4. IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, University of Deusto, Bilbao, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) can be 1.20 cases/1000 inhabitants/year in individuals ≥ 70 years old, in most series, the incidence of shunt-responsive iNPH appears to be <1/100,000 inhabitants/year. We report the results of a prospective 10-year longitudinal study of the incidence of iNPH in a northern Spanish population. METHODS: In a stable population of 590,000 inhabitants served by a single neurosurgical department, we periodically asked all primary care practitioners, neurologists, and geriatricians to refer for iNPH screening any patient with ventricular dilation who was complaining of motor disturbances, cognitive impairment, or sphincter dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2003 to December 2012, 293 patients were referred with suspected normal-pressure hydrocephalus. In 187 patients, iNPH was diagnosed; 89 of these patients were classified as probable iNPH, and 98 were classified as possible iNPH. Cerebrospinal fluid diversion was performed in 152 patients, and 119 showed a good outcome. The incidence of iNPH was significantly greater in male patients and patients >60 years old and increased exponentially with age. After age 60, the standardized age- and sex-adjusted incidence rates for iNPH, shunt surgery for iNPH, and shunt-responsive iNPH were 13.36 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year, 10.85 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year, and 8.55 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year. No differences were detected in the response rate between probable and possible iNPH (80.52% vs. 76.00%; P = 0.497). CONCLUSIONS: Even with a protocol for patient referral in place, reported iNPH incidence was lower than predicted, reflecting a persistent problem of underdiagnosis in our population.
BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) can be 1.20 cases/1000 inhabitants/year in individuals ≥ 70 years old, in most series, the incidence of shunt-responsive iNPH appears to be <1/100,000 inhabitants/year. We report the results of a prospective 10-year longitudinal study of the incidence of iNPH in a northern Spanish population. METHODS: In a stable population of 590,000 inhabitants served by a single neurosurgical department, we periodically asked all primary care practitioners, neurologists, and geriatricians to refer for iNPH screening any patient with ventricular dilation who was complaining of motor disturbances, cognitive impairment, or sphincter dysfunction. RESULTS: From January 2003 to December 2012, 293 patients were referred with suspected normal-pressure hydrocephalus. In 187 patients, iNPH was diagnosed; 89 of these patients were classified as probable iNPH, and 98 were classified as possible iNPH. Cerebrospinal fluid diversion was performed in 152 patients, and 119 showed a good outcome. The incidence of iNPH was significantly greater in male patients and patients >60 years old and increased exponentially with age. After age 60, the standardized age- and sex-adjusted incidence rates for iNPH, shunt surgery for iNPH, and shunt-responsive iNPH were 13.36 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year, 10.85 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year, and 8.55 cases/100,000 inhabitants/year. No differences were detected in the response rate between probable and possible iNPH (80.52% vs. 76.00%; P = 0.497). CONCLUSIONS: Even with a protocol for patient referral in place, reported iNPH incidence was lower than predicted, reflecting a persistent problem of underdiagnosis in our population.
Authors: Nityanand Miskin; Hersh Patel; Ana M Franceschi; Benjamin Ades-Aron; Alexander Le; Brianna E Damadian; Christian Stanton; Yafell Serulle; James Golomb; Oded Gonen; Henry Rusinek; Ajax E George Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Benjamin C Reeves; Jason K Karimy; Adam J Kundishora; Humberto Mestre; H Mert Cerci; Charles Matouk; Seth L Alper; Iben Lundgaard; Maiken Nedergaard; Kristopher T Kahle Journal: Trends Mol Med Date: 2020-01-18 Impact factor: 11.951
Authors: Jeffrey L Nadel; D Andrew Wilkinson; Joseph R Linzey; Cormac O Maher; Vikas Kotagal; Jason A Heth Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Rocío Fernández-Méndez; Hugh K Richards; Helen M Seeley; John D Pickard; Alexis J Joannides Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2019-03-25 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Johanna Andersson; Michelle Rosell; Karin Kockum; Otto Lilja-Lund; Lars Söderström; Katarina Laurell Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-05-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Albert M Isaacs; Jay Riva-Cambrin; Daniel Yavin; Aaron Hockley; Tamara M Pringsheim; Nathalie Jette; Brendan Cord Lethebe; Mark Lowerison; Jarred Dronyk; Mark G Hamilton Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 3.240