Literature DB >> 34969666

Can Shunt Response in Patients with Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Be Predicted from Preoperative Brain Imaging? A Retrospective Study of the Diagnostic Use of the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale in 119 Patients.

J F Carlsen1, A D L Backlund2, C A Mardal3, S Taudorf4, A V Holst5, T N Munch5,6,7, A E Hansen3,6, S G Hasselbalch4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale is a combined scoring of 7 different structural imaging markers on preoperative brain CT or MR imaging in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: callosal angle, Evans Index, Sylvian fissure dilation, apical sulcal narrowing, mean temporal horn diameter, periventricular WM lesions, and focal sulcal dilation. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the performance of the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale in distinguishing idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus shunt responders from nonresponders.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The preoperative MR imaging and CT scans of 119 patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus were scored using the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale. A summary shunt-response score assessed within 6 months from ventriculoperitoneal shunt surgery, combining the effect on cognition, gait, and urinary incontinence, was used as a reference. The difference between the mean Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale for responders and nonresponders was tested using the Student t test. The area under the curve was calculated for the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale to assess shunt response. To ascertain reproducibility, we assessed the interobserver agreement between the 2 independent observers as intraclass correlation coefficients for the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale for 74 MR imaging scans and 19 CT scans.
RESULTS: Ninety-four (79%) of 119 patients were shunt responders. The mean Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale score for shunt responders was 8.35 (SD, 1.53), and for nonresponders, 7.48 (SD, 1.53) (P = .02). The area under the curve for the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale was 0.66 (range, 0.54-0.78). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale was 0.86 for MR imaging and 0.82 for CT.
CONCLUSIONS: The Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Radscale showed moderate discrimination for shunt response but cannot, on its own, be used for selecting patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus for shunt surgery.
© 2022 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34969666      PMCID: PMC8985670          DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A7378

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol        ISSN: 0195-6108            Impact factor:   3.825


  41 in total

1.  Pre-and postoperative cerebral blood flow changes in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus measured by computed tomography (CT)-perfusion.

Authors:  Doerthe Ziegelitz; Jonathan Arvidsson; Per Hellström; Mats Tullberg; Carsten Wikkelsø; Göran Starck
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 6.200

Review 2.  Diagnosing idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Norman Relkin; Anthony Marmarou; Petra Klinge; Marvin Bergsneider; Peter McL Black
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.654

3.  Cerebral perfusion measured by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI is reduced in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Doerthe Ziegelitz; Göran Starck; David Kristiansen; Martin Jakobsson; Maria Hultenmo; Irene K Mikkelsen; Per Hellström; Mats Tullberg; Carsten Wikkelsø
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Utility of MRI-based disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus scoring for predicting prognosis after surgery for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: clinical research.

Authors:  Narihide Shinoda; Osamu Hirai; Shinya Hori; Kazuyuki Mikami; Toshiaki Bando; Daisuke Shimo; Takahiro Kuroyama; Yoji Kuramoto; Masato Matsumoto; Yasushi Ueno
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 5.115

Review 5.  Outcomes and complications of different surgical treatments for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Enrico Giordan; Giorgio Palandri; Giuseppe Lanzino; Mohammad Hassan Murad; Benjamin D Elder
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  Changes in brain morphology in patients in the preclinical stage of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Takashi Suehiro; Hiroaki Kazui; Hideki Kanemoto; Kenji Yoshiyama; Shunsuke Sato; Yukiko Suzuki; Shingo Azuma; Takuya Matsumoto; Haruhiko Kishima; Kazunari Ishii; Manabu Ikeda
Journal:  Psychogeriatrics       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 2.440

7.  A new scale for assessment of severity and outcome in iNPH.

Authors:  P Hellström; P Klinge; J Tans; C Wikkelsø
Journal:  Acta Neurol Scand       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 3.209

8.  Standardized image evaluation in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: consistency and reproducibility.

Authors:  Karin Kockum; Johan Virhammar; Katrine Riklund; Lars Söderström; Elna-Marie Larsson; Katarina Laurell
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2019-08-10       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 9.  Exploring mechanisms of ventricular enlargement in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a role of cerebrospinal fluid dynamics and motile cilia.

Authors:  Shigeki Yamada; Masatsune Ishikawa; Kazuhiko Nozaki
Journal:  Fluids Barriers CNS       Date:  2021-04-19

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of the iNPH Radscale in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Karin Kockum; Johan Virhammar; Katrine Riklund; Lars Söderström; Elna-Marie Larsson; Katarina Laurell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  Can preoperative brain imaging features predict shunt response in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus? A PRISMA review.

Authors:  Jonathan Frederik Carlsen; Tina Nørgaard Munch; Adam Espe Hansen; Steen Gregers Hasselbalch; Alexander Malcolm Rykkje
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2022-07-24       Impact factor: 2.995

2.  Cerebrospinal fluid osmolality cannot predict development or surgical outcome of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Eva Kjer Oernbo; Annette Buur Steffensen; Hanne Gredal; Helle Harding Poulsen; Nina Rostgaard; Cecilie Holm Rasmussen; Marlene Møller-Nissen; Anja Hviid Simonsen; Steen Gregers Hasselbalch; Marianne Juhler; Nanna MacAulay
Journal:  Fluids Barriers CNS       Date:  2022-06-27

3.  Value of CSF-Cl, CSF-GS, CSF-MALB, and CSF-ADA in Differential Diagnosis of Secondary Hydrocephalus.

Authors:  Junzhang Huang; Bing Chen
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-05-28       Impact factor: 3.009

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.