Practice guideline

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Response to shunting and predictors of response

John Halperin, Roger Kurlan, Jason M. Schwalb, Michael D. Cusimano, Gary Gronseth, David Gloss

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We evaluated evidence for utility of shunting in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) and for predictors of shunting effectiveness. Methods: We identified and classified relevant published studies according to 2004 and 2011 American Academy of Neurology methodology. Results: Of 21 articles, we identified 3 Class I articles. Conclusions: Shunting is possibly effective in iNPH (96% chance subjective improvement, 83% chance improvement on timed walk test at 6 months) (3 Class III). Serious adverse event risk was 11% (1 Class III). Predictors of success included elevated Ro (1 Class I, multiple Class II), impaired cerebral blood flow reactivity to acetazolamide (by SPECT) (1 Class I), and positive response to either external lumbar drainage (1 Class III) or repeated lumbar punctures. Age may not be a prognostic factor (1 Class II). Data are insufficient to judge efficacy of radionuclide cisternography or aqueductal flow measurement by MRI. Recommendations: Clinicians may choose to offer shunting for subjective iNPH symptoms and gait (Level C). Because of significant adverse event risk, risks and benefits should be carefully weighed (Level B). Clinicians should inform patients with iNPH with elevated Ro and their families that they have an increased chance of responding to shunting compared with those without such elevation (Level B). Clinicians may counsel patients with iNPH and their families that (1) positive response to external lumbar drainage or to repeated lumbar punctures increases the chance of response to shunting, and (2) increasing age does not decrease the chance of shunting being successful (both Level C).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2063-2071
Number of pages9
JournalNeurology
Volume85
Issue number23
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 8 2015

Fingerprint

Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus
Practice Guidelines
Spinal Puncture
Drainage
Cerebrovascular Circulation
Acetazolamide
Single-Photon Emission-Computed Tomography
Gait
Radioisotopes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Halperin, John ; Kurlan, Roger ; Schwalb, Jason M. ; Cusimano, Michael D. ; Gronseth, Gary ; Gloss, David. / Practice guideline : Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Response to shunting and predictors of response. In: Neurology. 2015 ; Vol. 85, No. 23. pp. 2063-2071.
@article{89a7c17e621c47c7b49d741a13238568,
title = "Practice guideline: Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Response to shunting and predictors of response",
abstract = "We evaluated evidence for utility of shunting in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) and for predictors of shunting effectiveness. Methods: We identified and classified relevant published studies according to 2004 and 2011 American Academy of Neurology methodology. Results: Of 21 articles, we identified 3 Class I articles. Conclusions: Shunting is possibly effective in iNPH (96{\%} chance subjective improvement, 83{\%} chance improvement on timed walk test at 6 months) (3 Class III). Serious adverse event risk was 11{\%} (1 Class III). Predictors of success included elevated Ro (1 Class I, multiple Class II), impaired cerebral blood flow reactivity to acetazolamide (by SPECT) (1 Class I), and positive response to either external lumbar drainage (1 Class III) or repeated lumbar punctures. Age may not be a prognostic factor (1 Class II). Data are insufficient to judge efficacy of radionuclide cisternography or aqueductal flow measurement by MRI. Recommendations: Clinicians may choose to offer shunting for subjective iNPH symptoms and gait (Level C). Because of significant adverse event risk, risks and benefits should be carefully weighed (Level B). Clinicians should inform patients with iNPH with elevated Ro and their families that they have an increased chance of responding to shunting compared with those without such elevation (Level B). Clinicians may counsel patients with iNPH and their families that (1) positive response to external lumbar drainage or to repeated lumbar punctures increases the chance of response to shunting, and (2) increasing age does not decrease the chance of shunting being successful (both Level C).",
author = "John Halperin and Roger Kurlan and Schwalb, {Jason M.} and Cusimano, {Michael D.} and Gary Gronseth and David Gloss",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1212/WNL.0000000000002193",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "2063--2071",
journal = "Neurology",
issn = "0028-3878",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "23",

}

Practice guideline : Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Response to shunting and predictors of response. / Halperin, John; Kurlan, Roger; Schwalb, Jason M.; Cusimano, Michael D.; Gronseth, Gary; Gloss, David.

In: Neurology, Vol. 85, No. 23, 08.12.2015, p. 2063-2071.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practice guideline

T2 - Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: Response to shunting and predictors of response

AU - Halperin, John

AU - Kurlan, Roger

AU - Schwalb, Jason M.

AU - Cusimano, Michael D.

AU - Gronseth, Gary

AU - Gloss, David

PY - 2015/12/8

Y1 - 2015/12/8

N2 - We evaluated evidence for utility of shunting in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) and for predictors of shunting effectiveness. Methods: We identified and classified relevant published studies according to 2004 and 2011 American Academy of Neurology methodology. Results: Of 21 articles, we identified 3 Class I articles. Conclusions: Shunting is possibly effective in iNPH (96% chance subjective improvement, 83% chance improvement on timed walk test at 6 months) (3 Class III). Serious adverse event risk was 11% (1 Class III). Predictors of success included elevated Ro (1 Class I, multiple Class II), impaired cerebral blood flow reactivity to acetazolamide (by SPECT) (1 Class I), and positive response to either external lumbar drainage (1 Class III) or repeated lumbar punctures. Age may not be a prognostic factor (1 Class II). Data are insufficient to judge efficacy of radionuclide cisternography or aqueductal flow measurement by MRI. Recommendations: Clinicians may choose to offer shunting for subjective iNPH symptoms and gait (Level C). Because of significant adverse event risk, risks and benefits should be carefully weighed (Level B). Clinicians should inform patients with iNPH with elevated Ro and their families that they have an increased chance of responding to shunting compared with those without such elevation (Level B). Clinicians may counsel patients with iNPH and their families that (1) positive response to external lumbar drainage or to repeated lumbar punctures increases the chance of response to shunting, and (2) increasing age does not decrease the chance of shunting being successful (both Level C).

AB - We evaluated evidence for utility of shunting in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) and for predictors of shunting effectiveness. Methods: We identified and classified relevant published studies according to 2004 and 2011 American Academy of Neurology methodology. Results: Of 21 articles, we identified 3 Class I articles. Conclusions: Shunting is possibly effective in iNPH (96% chance subjective improvement, 83% chance improvement on timed walk test at 6 months) (3 Class III). Serious adverse event risk was 11% (1 Class III). Predictors of success included elevated Ro (1 Class I, multiple Class II), impaired cerebral blood flow reactivity to acetazolamide (by SPECT) (1 Class I), and positive response to either external lumbar drainage (1 Class III) or repeated lumbar punctures. Age may not be a prognostic factor (1 Class II). Data are insufficient to judge efficacy of radionuclide cisternography or aqueductal flow measurement by MRI. Recommendations: Clinicians may choose to offer shunting for subjective iNPH symptoms and gait (Level C). Because of significant adverse event risk, risks and benefits should be carefully weighed (Level B). Clinicians should inform patients with iNPH with elevated Ro and their families that they have an increased chance of responding to shunting compared with those without such elevation (Level B). Clinicians may counsel patients with iNPH and their families that (1) positive response to external lumbar drainage or to repeated lumbar punctures increases the chance of response to shunting, and (2) increasing age does not decrease the chance of shunting being successful (both Level C).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84949495709&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84949495709&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002193

DO - 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002193

M3 - Article

VL - 85

SP - 2063

EP - 2071

JO - Neurology

JF - Neurology

SN - 0028-3878

IS - 23

ER -