Beyond early motor response: Longitudinal cognitive and gait assessments after extended lumbar drainage in normal pressure hydrocephalus

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY European Journal of Neurology Pub Date : 2025-03-14 DOI:10.1111/ene.16567
Stefano Caneva, Mehrnaz Hamedani, Alessandro Pesaresi, Laura Mori, Annalisa Marzi, Lucia Pellegrino, Paolo Merciadri, Andrea Bianconi, Gianluigi Zona, Matteo Pardini, Pietro Fiaschi
{"title":"Beyond early motor response: Longitudinal cognitive and gait assessments after extended lumbar drainage in normal pressure hydrocephalus","authors":"Stefano Caneva,&nbsp;Mehrnaz Hamedani,&nbsp;Alessandro Pesaresi,&nbsp;Laura Mori,&nbsp;Annalisa Marzi,&nbsp;Lucia Pellegrino,&nbsp;Paolo Merciadri,&nbsp;Andrea Bianconi,&nbsp;Gianluigi Zona,&nbsp;Matteo Pardini,&nbsp;Pietro Fiaschi","doi":"10.1111/ene.16567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a multifactorial progressive disease affecting cognition, gait, and urinary continence, potentially reversible, or at least improvable, by a prompt surgical intervention. Given its potential surgical improvement, it is crucial to determine who will benefit of a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt. To date, although several procedures are considered useful to diagnose iNPH, there is no agreement concerning the best timing of the clinical assessment or the role played by formal cognitive testing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty participants with suspected iNPH were assessed at baseline, 2, and 15 days after 24-h extended lumbar drainage (ELD). Timed Up and Go test (TUG), Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) were administered in order to quantify motor and cognitive performances. The TUG was used to assess clinical response to ELD.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Our sample showed significant differences between baseline assessment and follow-ups in the majority of tests. Although some enhancements in performances appeared in the first post-ELD assessment, both treatment responders and non-responders showed better performances in the delayed assessment. Post hoc comparison found significant differences in each time point between the two groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These results emphasize the key role of performing multiple assessments post CSF drainage, as response can be more prominent in a delayed rather than an early phase.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11954,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Neurology","volume":"32 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ene.16567","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ene.16567","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a multifactorial progressive disease affecting cognition, gait, and urinary continence, potentially reversible, or at least improvable, by a prompt surgical intervention. Given its potential surgical improvement, it is crucial to determine who will benefit of a ventriculo-peritoneal shunt. To date, although several procedures are considered useful to diagnose iNPH, there is no agreement concerning the best timing of the clinical assessment or the role played by formal cognitive testing.

Methods

Thirty participants with suspected iNPH were assessed at baseline, 2, and 15 days after 24-h extended lumbar drainage (ELD). Timed Up and Go test (TUG), Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) were administered in order to quantify motor and cognitive performances. The TUG was used to assess clinical response to ELD.

Results

Our sample showed significant differences between baseline assessment and follow-ups in the majority of tests. Although some enhancements in performances appeared in the first post-ELD assessment, both treatment responders and non-responders showed better performances in the delayed assessment. Post hoc comparison found significant differences in each time point between the two groups.

Conclusions

These results emphasize the key role of performing multiple assessments post CSF drainage, as response can be more prominent in a delayed rather than an early phase.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Neurology
European Journal of Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
2.00%
发文量
418
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Neurology is the official journal of the European Academy of Neurology and covers all areas of clinical and basic research in neurology, including pre-clinical research of immediate translational value for new potential treatments. Emphasis is placed on major diseases of large clinical and socio-economic importance (dementia, stroke, epilepsy, headache, multiple sclerosis, movement disorders, and infectious diseases).
期刊最新文献
Beyond early motor response: Longitudinal cognitive and gait assessments after extended lumbar drainage in normal pressure hydrocephalus Is a Benign Disease Course Possible in Untreated AQP4-IgG NMOSD? Optimizing Prehospital Acute Transfer of Patients With Presumed Stroke Given Economic Constraints Neurology Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review Intracerebral Hemorrhage in Autosomal Dominant Cerebral Arteriopathy With Subcortical Infarcts and Leukoencephalopathy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1