Search

Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) leads to cognitive impairment (CI) as part of its triad of symptoms. Assessment of CI before and after a tap test can be used to inform diagnosis, differentiate NPH symptoms from alternative or concomitant causes of CI, and suggest the potential benefits of valve placement. The aims of this study are: to describe cognitive performance in patients with NPH diagnosis before and after a tap test, and to compare CI between patients with NPH meeting criteria for a dementia diagnosis (D +) and those without criteria for dementia (D−) at both baseline and after the tap-test. We performed a Before-and-after study evaluating clinical features and performance on cognitive tests (CERAD, ADAS-COG, SVF, PVF, ROCF and IFS). We included 76 NPH patients, with a median age of 81 years. 65 patients (87.8%) improved cognitive performance after tap test. ROCF (p = 0.018) and IFS (p < 0.001) scores significantly change after the tap test. Dementia was concomitant in 68.4% of patients. D + group showed higher proportion of patients with altered performance in IFS, PVF, SVF, and ROCF than D- group at baseline (p < 0.05). A significant improvement in SVF and IFS was observed exclusively in the D− group after tap test. Our results suggest that executive function and praxis are the cognitive domains more susceptible to improvement after a tap test in a 24-h interval in NPH patients. Moreover, the D− group showed a higher proportion of improvement after the tap test in executive function and verbal fluency test compared with the D + group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) is usually the primary choice for cerebrospinal fluid shunting for most neurosurgeons, while ventriculoatrial shunt (VAS) is a second-line procedure because of historical complications. Remarkably, there is no robust evidence claiming the superiority of VPS over VAS. Thus, we aimed to compare both procedures through a meta-analysis., Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, the authors systematically searched the literature for articles comparing VAS with VPS. The included articles had to detail one of the following outcomes: revisions, infections, shunt-related mortality, or complications. In addition, the cohort for each shunt model had to encompass more than 4 patients., Results: Of 1872 articles, 16 met our criteria, involving 4304 patients, with 1619 undergoing VAS and 2685 receiving VPS placement. Analysis of revision surgeries showed no significant difference between VAS and VPS (risk ratio [RR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.9-1.34; I2 = 84%, random effects). Regarding infections, the analysis also found no significant difference between the groups (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.36-1.25; I2 = 74%, random effects). There was no statistically significant disparity between both methods concerning shunt-related deaths (RR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.68-6.60; I2 = 56%, random effects). Included studies after 2000 showed no VAS led to cardiopulmonary complications, and only 1 shunt-related death could be identified., Conclusion: Both methods show no significant differences in procedure revisions, infections, and shunt-related mortality. The literature is outdated, research in adults is lacking, and future randomized studies are crucial to understand the profile of VAS when comparing it with VPS. The final decision on which distal site for cerebrospinal shunting to use should be based on the patient's characteristics and the surgeon's expertise., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2023. All rights reserved.)