Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T19:36:41.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neurocognitive outcome after endoscopic third ventriculocisterostomy in patients with obstructive hydrocephalus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

MAUREEN LACY ,
MARTIN OLIVEIRA ,
EMILY AUSTRIA  and
M. DAVID FRIM
MAUREEN LACY*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
MARTIN OLIVEIRA
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
EMILY AUSTRIA
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
M. DAVID FRIM
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Maureen Lacy, Department of Psychiatry, Section of Neuropsychology, MC3077, University of Chicago Medical Center, 5841 S. Maryland, Chicago, Illinois 60637. E-mail: mlacy@yoda.bsd.uchicago.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Obstructive hydrocephalus can be treated with an extracranial shunting system or, when the obstruction is between the posterior third ventricle and the fourth ventricular outflow tracts, by an endoscopic third ventriculocisternostomy (ETV). The placement of an extracranial shunting device entails significant long-term risk of infection and malfunction. This risk has led to the concept that ETV is preferable to shunting. While the long-term cognitive performance of shunted hydrocephalus patients has been extensively examined, the outcome of patients undergoing ETV has been studied only sparsely. Ten adults who had undergone ETV were entered into the study under institutional review board approval. Each patient underwent a neuropsychological testing battery that included testing within the domains of basic attention, verbal memory, visual memory, language, and executive functioning. Aggregate test scores showed a decrease in performance in the domains of memory and executive functioning when compared to normative data. The present study revealed persistent cognitive inefficiencies in memory and executive domains in patients post-ETV intervention. A larger longitudinal study considering the impact of prior shunting, presence of headaches, emotional status, and surgical complications will assist in elucidating the etiology and eventual treatment of these deficits. (JINS, 2009, 15, 394–398.)

Keywords

ETVHydrocephalusCognitionExecutive skillsMemoryCSF
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , May 2009 , pp. 394 - 398
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Beck, A.T. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Benabarre, A., Ibanez, J., Boget, T., Obiols, J., Martinez-Aran, A., & Vieta, E. (2001). Neuropsychological and psychiatric complications in endoscopic third ventriculostomy: A clinical case report. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 71, 268–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benedict, R.H.B. (1997). Brief Visuospatial Memory Test–Revised. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
Bonanni, R., Carlesimo, G.A., & Caltagirone, C. (2004). Amnesia following endoscopic third ventriculostomy: A single case study. European Neurology, 51, 118–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burtscher, J., Bartha, L., Twerdy, K., Eisner, W., & Benke, T. (2003). Effect of endoscopic third ventriculostomy on neuropsychological outcome in late onset idiopathic aqueduct stenosis: A prospective study. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 74, 222–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chelune, G.J., Naugle, R.I., Luders, H., Sedlak, J., & Awad, I.A. (1993). Individual change after epilepsy surgery: Practice effects and base-rate information. Neuropsychology, 7, 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derogatis, L.R. (1994). Checklist-90–Revised. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems, Inc.Google Scholar
Duinkerke, A., Williams, M.A., Rigamonti, D., & Hillis, A.E. (2004). Cognitive recovery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus after shunt. Cognitive Behavioral Neurology, 17, 179–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erickson, K., Baron, I.S., & Fantie, B.D. (2001). Neuropsychological functioning in early hydrocephalus: Review from a developmental perspective. Child Neuropsychology, 7, 199–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frim, D.M. & Goumnerova, L.C. (1997). Telemetric intraventricular pressure measurements after third ventriculocisternostomy in a patient with noncommunicating hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery, 41, 1425–1428; discussion 1428–1430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frim, D.M., Lathrop, D., & Goumnerova, L. (2000). Intraventricular pressure changes following third ventriculostomy for aqueductal stenosis. Presented at Annual Meeting, Congress of Neurological Surgeons, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Garton, H.J. & Piatt, J.H. Jr. (2004). Hydrocephalus. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 51, 305–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golden, J.C. (1978). Stroop Color and Word Test. Chicago, IL: Stoelting.Google Scholar
Hellwig, D., Grotenhuis, J.A., Tirakotai, W., Riegel, T., Schulte, D.M., Bauer, B.L., & Bertalanffy, H. (2005). Endoscopic third ventriculostomy for obstructive hydrocephalus. Neurosurgical Review, 28, 1–34; discussion 35–38.Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, R.F., Stening, W.A., & Brydon, M. (1990). Endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Neurosurgery, 26, 86–91; discussion 91–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kranz, D. (1997). Hydrocephalus Association: Fact sheet: Endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Retrieved June 13, 2008, from http://www.hydroassoc.org/docs/FactSheet_Third_Ventricular_Endoscopy.pdf.Google Scholar
Mataro, M., Junque, C., Poca, M.A., & Sahuquillo, J. (2001). Neuropsychological findings in congenital and acquired childhood hydrocephalus. Neuropsychology Review, 11, 169–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Bryant, S.E., Marcus, D.A., Rains, J.C., & Penzien, D.B. (2006). The neuropsychology of recurrent headache. Headache, 46(9), 1364–1376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Randolph, C. (1998). Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google ScholarPubMed
Ravishankar, N. & Demakis, G.J. (2007). The neuropsychology of migrane. Disease-a-Month, 53(3), 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reitan, R. & Wolfson, D. (1993). The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: Theory and clinical interpretation. Tucson, AZ: Neuropsychology Press.Google Scholar
Rekate, H.L. (2007). Longstanding overt ventriculomegaly in adults: Pitfalls in treatment with endoscopic third ventriculostomy. Neurosurgical Focus, 22(4), E6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, G., McGirt, M.J., Woodworth, G., Heidler, J., Rigamonti, D., Hillis, A.E., & Williams, M.A. (2005). Baseline neuropsychological profile and cognitive response to cerebrospinal fluid shunting for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 20, 163–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D. (2001). Wechsler Test of Adult Reading: Examiner’s Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar