Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Neuropsychological assessments and cognitive profile mostly associated with shunt surgery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus patients: diagnostic and predictive parameters and practical implications

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Cognitive decline is a well-documented feature of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) that can be reversible following cerebrospinal fluid tap tests (CSF-TT). The current gold standard for selecting iNPH patients for shunt surgery is measurable improvement in gait tests following CSF–TT. However, the diagnostic significance and predictive role of pre-surgical cognitive evaluations in probable iNPH patients is still controversial.

Purpose

To find the neuropsychological (NPSY) tests and cognitive aspects mostly associated with shunt surgery in iNPH.

Material and methods

A retrospective comparison between probable iNPH patients who, after undergoing CSF–TT with gait and cognitive evaluations, ended up receiving a shunt (group 1) and probable iNPH patients who ended up with no shunt surgery (group 2). Differences in the diagnostic and predictive results of variety of NPSY tests at baseline, pre-CSF-TT, and post-CSF-TT were used for thorough statistical calculations.

Results

A total of 147 patients with probable iNPH were included. Of those, 58 (39.45%, group 1) patients underwent shunt surgery, while 89 (60.55%, group 2) did not. For the vast majority of the cognitive tests used, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups at baseline (pre-CSF-TT). Following CSF-TT, the “naming” component of the Cognistat test was the only single test to show statically significant difference in improvement between the two groups. Combining at least two tests led to increased levels of accuracy and specificity; however, the sensitivity remained < 50. The only two combinations that were associated with sensitivity ≥ 70 were either any improvement in the Cognistat test (p = 0.627) or any improvement in either its naming, memory, or judgment components (p = 0.015).

Conclusion

Cognitive tests, even when combined to cover several cognitive aspects, are not sensitive enough to act as an independent reliable diagnostic and predictive tool, especially when relying on their scores as baseline. In order to avoid cumbersome and unnecessary tests to our patients and to reduce the number of patients who are denied proper treatment due to misdiagnosis, we recommend to use NPSY tests that examine the cognitive aspects of naming and memory, in addition to 2–3 tests for executive functions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allali G, Laidet M, Armand S, Momjian S, Marques B, Saj A, Assal F (2017) A combined cognitive and gait quantification to identify normal pressure hydrocephalus from its mimics: the Geneva’s protocol. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 160:5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2017.06.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bakar EE, Bakar B (2010) Neuropsychological assessment of adult patients with shunted hydrocephalus. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 47:191–198. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2010.47.3.191

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Beber BC, Chaves MLF (2014) The basis and applications of the action fluency and action naming tasks. Dement Neuropsychol 8:47–57. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1980-57642014dn81000008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Behrens A, Elgh E, Leijon G, Kristensen B, Eklund A, Malm J (2019) The computerized general neuropsychological INPH test revealed improvement in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus after shunt surgery. J Neurosurg:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.10.Jns18701

  5. Boon AJ, Tans JT, Delwel EJ, Egeler-Peerdeman SM, Hanlo PW, Wurzer JA, Hermans J (1997) Dutch normal pressure hydrocephalus study: baseline characteristics with emphasis on clinical findings. Eur J Neurol 4:39–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.1997.tb00297.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bugalho P, Alves L, Miguel R, Ribeiro O (2014) Profile of cognitive dysfunction and relation with gait disturbance in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 118:83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.01.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Burnett MG, Sonnad SS, Stein SC (2006) Screening tests for normal-pressure hydrocephalus: sensitivity, specificity, and cost. J Neurosurg 105:823–829. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2006.105.6.823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Davis C, Heidler-Gary J, Gottesman RF, Crinion J, Newhart M, Moghekar A, Soloman D, Rigamonti D, Cloutman L, Hillis AE (2010) Action versus animal naming fluency in subcortical dementia, frontal dementias, and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurocase 16:259–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/13554790903456183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Duinkerke A, Williams MA, Rigamonti D, Hillis AE (2004) Cognitive recovery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus after shunt. Cogn Behav Neurol 17:179–184. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnn.0000124916.16017.6a

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gallagher RM, Marquez J, Osmotherly P (2018) Cognitive and upper limb symptom changes from a tap test in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 174:92–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2018.09.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gleichgerrcht E, Cervio A, Salvat J, Loffredo AR, Vita L, Roca M, Torralva T, Manes F (2009) Executive function improvement in normal pressure hydrocephalus following shunt surgery. Behav Neurol 21:181–185. https://doi.org/10.3233/ben-2009-0249

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Golomb J, Wisoff J, Miller DC, Boksay I, Kluger A, Weiner H, Salton J, Graves W (2000) Alzheimer’s disease comorbidity in normal pressure hydrocephalus: prevalence and shunt response. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 68:778–781. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.68.6.778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Graff-Radford NR, Godersky JC, Jones MP (1989) Variables predicting surgical outcome in symptomatic hydrocephalus in the elderly. Neurology 39:1601–1604. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.39.12.1601

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hakim S, Adams RD (1965) The special clinical problem of symptomatic hydrocephalus with normal cerebrospinal fluid pressure. Observations on cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics. J Neurol Sci 2:307–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-510x(65)90016-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hellström P, Klinge P, Tans J, Wikkelsø C (2012) A new scale for assessment of severity and outcome in iNPH. Acta Neurol Scand 126:229–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.2012.01677.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Henry GK, Algina J (2013) Use of the color trails test as an embedded measure of performance validity. Clin Neuropsychol 27:864–876. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2013.786758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Juby A, Tench S, Baker V (2002) The value of clock drawing in identifying executive cognitive dysfunction in people with a normal mini-mental state examination score. CMAJ 167:859–864

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahlon B, Sundbärg G, Rehncrona S (2002) Comparison between the lumbar infusion and CSF tap tests to predict outcome after shunt surgery in suspected normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 73:721–726. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.73.6.721

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Katzen H, Ravdin LD, Assuras S, Heros R, Kaplitt M, Schwartz TH, Fink M, Levin BE, Relkin NR (2011) Postshunt cognitive and functional improvement in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 68:416–419. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e3181ff9d01

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kiefer M, Unterberg A (2012) The differential diagnosis and treatment of normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Dtsch Arztebl Int 109:15–25. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2012.0015 (quiz 26)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Koivisto AM, Alafuzoff I, Savolainen S, Sutela A, Rummukainen J, Kurki M, Jääskeläinen JE, Soininen H, Rinne J, Leinonen V (2013) Poor cognitive outcome in shunt-responsive idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 72:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e31827414b3 (discussion 8)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Laidet M, Herrmann FR, Momjian S, Assal F, Allali G (2015) Improvement in executive subfunctions following cerebrospinal fluid tap test identifies idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus from its mimics. Eur J Neurol 22:1533–1539. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.12779

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Marmarou A, Young HF, Aygok GA, Sawauchi S, Tsuji O, Yamamoto T, Dunbar J (2005) Diagnosis and management of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: a prospective study in 151 patients. J Neurosurg 102:987–997. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2005.102.6.0987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mathew R, Pavithran S (2017) Cognition in advanced normal pressure hydrocephalus: a pilot study from South India. Neurol India 65:729–731. https://doi.org/10.4103/neuroindia.NI_1219_15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Matsuoka T, Kawano S, Fujimoto K, Kawahara M, Hashimoto H (2019) Characteristics of cognitive function evaluation using the Montreal cognitive assessment in a cerebrospinal fluid tap test in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 186:105524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McGovern RA, Nelp TB, Kelly KM, Chan AK, Mazzoni P, Sheth SA, Honig LS, Teich AF, McKhann GM (2019) Predicting cognitive improvement in normal pressure hydrocephalus patients using preoperative neuropsychological testing and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. Neurosurgery 85:E662-e669. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyz102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mihalj M, Dolić K, Kolić K, Ledenko V (2016) CSF tap test - obsolete or appropriate test for predicting shunt responsiveness? A systemic review. J Neurol Sci 362:78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2016.01.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Missori P, Currà A (2015) Progressive cognitive impairment evolving to dementia parallels parieto-occipital and temporal enlargement in idiopathic chronic hydrocephalus: a retrospective cohort study. Front Neurol 6:15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2015.00015

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Miyoshi N, Kazui H, Ogino A, Ishikawa M, Miyake H, Tokunaga H, Ikejiri Y, Takeda M (2005) Association between cognitive impairment and gait disturbance in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 20:71–76. https://doi.org/10.1159/000085858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mori E, Ishikawa M, Kato T, Kazui H, Miyake H, Miyajima M, Nakajima M, Hashimoto M, Kuriyama N, Tokuda T, Ishii K, Kaijima M, Hirata Y, Saito M, Arai H (2012) Guidelines for management of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: second edition. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 52:775–809. https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.52.775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mueller J KR, Langston J (2001) Manual for Cognistat : the neurobehavioral cognitive status examination. Northern California Neurobehavioral Group, Fairfax, Calif

  32. Müller-Schmitz K, Krasavina-Loka N, Yardimci T, Lipka T, Kolman AGJ, Robbers S, Menge T, Kujovic M, Seitz RJ (2020) Normal pressure hydrocephalus associated with Alzheimer’s disease. Ann Neurol 88:703–711. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nesset M, Kersten H, Ulstein ID (2014) Brief tests such as the clock drawing test or Cognistat can be useful predictors of conversion from MCI to dementia in the clinical assessment of outpatients. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra 4:263–270. https://doi.org/10.1159/000363734

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Ogino A, Kazui H, Miyoshi N, Hashimoto M, Ohkawa S, Tokunaga H, Ikejiri Y, Takeda M (2006) Cognitive impairment in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 21:113–119. https://doi.org/10.1159/000090510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Peterson KA, Savulich G, Jackson D, Killikelly C, Pickard JD, Sahakian BJ (2016) The effect of shunt surgery on neuropsychological performance in normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol 263:1669–1677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-016-8097-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Picascia M, Pozzi NG, Todisco M, Minafra B, Sinforiani E, Zangaglia R, Ceravolo R, Pacchetti C (2019) Cognitive disorders in normal pressure hydrocephalus with initial parkinsonism in comparison with de novo Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol 26:74–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13766

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Picascia M, Zangaglia R, Bernini S, Minafra B, Sinforiani E, Pacchetti C (2015) A review of cognitive impairment and differential diagnosis in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Funct Neurol 30:217–228. https://doi.org/10.11138/fneur/2015.30.4.217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Raftopoulos C, Deleval J, Chaskis C, Leonard A, Cantraine F, Desmyttere F, Clarysse S, Brotchi J (1994) Cognitive recovery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a prospective study. Neurosurgery 35:397–404. https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-199409000-00006 (discussion 404-395)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Saito M, Nishio Y, Kanno S, Uchiyama M, Hayashi A, Takagi M, Kikuchi H, Yamasaki H, Shimomura T, Iizuka O, Mori E (2011) Cognitive profile of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra 1:202–211. https://doi.org/10.1159/000328924

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Savolainen S, Hurskainen H, Paljärvi L, Alafuzoff I, Vapalahti M (2002) Five-year outcome of normal pressure hydrocephalus with or without a shunt: predictive value of the clinical signs, neuropsychological evaluation and infusion test. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 144:515–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-002-0936-3 (discussion 523)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Schmidt H, Elster J, Eckert I, Wiefek J, Paulus W, von Steinbuechel N, Abatih EN, Blocher J (2014) Cognitive functions after spinal tap in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol 261:2344–2350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-014-7489-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Skalický P, Mládek A, Vlasák A, De Lacy P, Beneš V, Bradáč O (2019) Normal pressure hydrocephalus-an overview of pathophysiological mechanisms and diagnostic procedures. Neurosurg Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-019-01201-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Solana E, Sahuquillo J, Junqué C, Quintana M, Poca MA (2012) Cognitive disturbances and neuropsychological changes after surgical treatment in a cohort of 185 patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 27:304–317. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acs002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Tarnaris A, Toma AK, Pullen E, Chapman MD, Petzold A, Cipolotti L, Kitchen ND, Keir G, Lemieux L, Watkins LD (2011) Cognitive, biochemical, and imaging profile of patients suffering from idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Alzheimers Dement 7:501–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.01.003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Thomas G, McGirt MJ, Woodworth G, Heidler J, Rigamonti D, Hillis AE, Williams MA (2005) Baseline neuropsychological profile and cognitive response to cerebrospinal fluid shunting for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 20:163–168. https://doi.org/10.1159/000087092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tsakanikas D, Relkin N (2007) Normal pressure hydrocephalus. Semin Neurol 27:58–65. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-956756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Walchenbach R, Geiger E, Thomeer RT, Vanneste JA (2002) The value of temporary external lumbar CSF drainage in predicting the outcome of shunting on normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 72:503–506. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.72.4.503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Wikkelsø C, Hellström P, Klinge PM, Tans JT (2013) The European iNPH multicentre study on the predictive values of resistance to CSF outflow and the CSF Tap Test in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 84:562–568. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2012-303314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Woods SP, Scott JC, Sires DA, Grant I, Heaton RK, Tröster AI (2005) Action (verb) fluency: test-retest reliability, normative standards, and construct validity. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 11:408–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted as part of for the first author’s (M.N) requirements for her medical degree (Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University)

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neurosurgery Department, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, Tel-Aviv University, Zeev Jabutinsky Rd 39, 49100, Petah Tikva, Israel

    Mor Nimni & Yosef Laviv

  2. The Occupational Therapist Service, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, Tel-Aviv University, Petah Tikva, Israel

    Penina Weiss & Chen Cohen

Authors
  1. Mor Nimni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Penina Weiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chen Cohen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yosef Laviv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yosef Laviv.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The manuscript does not contain clinical studies or patient data.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on CSF Circulation

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nimni, M., Weiss, P., Cohen, C. et al. Neuropsychological assessments and cognitive profile mostly associated with shunt surgery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus patients: diagnostic and predictive parameters and practical implications. Acta Neurochir 163, 3373–3386 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-021-04976-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-021-04976-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation