Extended lumbar drainage in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy

References

• Hakim S, Some observations on CSF pressure. Hydrocephalic syndrome in adults with “normal” CSF pressure (Recognition of a new syndrome). 1964.
   Google Scholar
• Kazui H, Miyajima M, Mori E, Ishikawa M. Lumboperitoneal shunt surgery for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (SINPHONI-2): an open-label randomised trial. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:585–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashimoto M, Ishikawa M, Mori E, Study of INPH on neurological improvement (SINPHONI), et al. Diagnosis of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus is supported by MRI-based scheme: a prospective cohort study. Cerebrospinal Fluid Res 2010;7:18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wikkelso C, Hellstrom P, Klinge PM, on behalf of the European iNPH Multicentre Study Group, et al. 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 2013;84:562–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boon AJ, Tans JT, Delwel EJ, et al. Dutch normal-pressure hydrocephalus study: prediction of outcome after shunting by resistance to outflow of cerebrospinal fluid. J Neurosurg 1997;87:687–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pujari S, Kharkar S, Metellus P, et al. Normal pressure hydrocephalus: long-term outcome after shunt surgery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:1282–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vakili S, Moran D, Hung A, et al. Timing of surgical treatment for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: association between treatment delay and reduced short-term benefit. Neurosurg Focus 2016;41:E2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrén K, Wikkelsø C, Tisell M, Hellström P. Natural course of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014;85:806–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walchenbach R, Geiger E, Thomeer R, Vanneste J. The value of temporary external lumbar CSF drainage in predicting the outcome of shunting on normal pressure hydrocephalus. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002;72:503–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panagiotopoulos V, Konstantinou D, Kalogeropoulos A, Maraziotis T. The predictive value of external continuous lumbar drainage, with cerebrospinal fluid outflow controlled by medium pressure valve, in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2005;147:953–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mori E, Ishikawa M, Kato T, Japanese Society of Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus, et al. Guidelines for management of idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: second edition. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2012;52:775–809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, QUADAS-2 Group, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:529–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AWS, et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:982–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu H, Cole SR. Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:1331–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunn DJ, Thomas A, Best N, Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS – A Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat Comput 2000;10:325–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbord R. METANDI: Stata module to perform meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy. Stat Softw Components 2008;S456932. Available from: https://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s456932.html.
   Google Scholar
• Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med 2001;20:2865–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbord RM, Deeks JJ, Egger M, et al. A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics 2007;8:239–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arends LR, Hamza TH, van Houwelingen JC, et al. Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves. Med Decis Making 2008;28:621–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen IH, Huang CI, Liu HC, Chen KK. Effectiveness of shunting in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus predicted by temporary, controlled-resistance, continuous lumbar drainage: a pilot study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994;57:1430–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haan J, Thomeer RT. Predictive value of temporary external lumbar drainage in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 1988;22:388–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miyajima M, Kazui H, Mori E, Ishikawa M, on behalf of the SINPHONI-2 Investigators. One-year outcome in patients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: comparison of lumboperitoneal shunt to ventriculoperitoneal shunt. J Neurosurg 2016;125:1483–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black PM. Idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Results of shunting in 62 patients. J Neurosurg 1980;52:371–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delwel EJ, de Jong DA, Avezaat C. The prognostic value of clinical characteristics and parameters of cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics in shunting for idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2005;147:1037–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodworth GF, McGirt MJ, Williams MA, Rigamonti D. Cerebrospinal fluid drainage and dynamics in the diagnosis of normal pressure hydrocephalus. Neurosurgery 2009;64:919–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chotai S, Medel R, Herial NA, Medhkour A. External lumbar drain: a pragmatic test for prediction of shunt outcomes in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus. Surg Neurol Int 2014;5:12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eide PK, Stanisic M. Cerebral microdialysis and intracranial pressure monitoring in patients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus: association with clinical response to extended lumbar drainage and shunt surgery. J Neurosurg 2010;112:414–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paidakakos N, Borgarello S, Naddeo M. Indications for endoscopic third ventriculostomy in normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir Suppl 2012;113:123–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams MA, Razumovsky AY, Hanley DF. Comparison of Pcsf monitoring and controlled CSF drainage diagnose normal pressure hydrocephalus. Acta Neurochir Suppl 1998;71:328–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li Z, Naugle RI, Wood A, et al. Intermittent lumbar drainage with functional testing in the diagnosis of normal-pressure hydrocephalus. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2001;11: S38–S40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zemack G, Romner B. Adjustable valves in normal-pressure hydrocephalus: a retrospective study of 218 patients. Neurosurgery 2002;51:1392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boon AJ, Tans JT, Delwel EJ, et al. Dutch Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus Study: randomized comparison of low- and medium-pressure shunts. J Neurosurg 1998;88:490–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klinge P, Hellstrom P, Tans J, Wikkelso C, on behalf of the European iNPH Multicentre Study Group. One-year outcome in the European multicentre study on iNPH. Acta Neurol Scand 2012;126:145–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein SC, Burnett MG, Sonnad SS. Shunts in normal-pressure hydrocephalus: do we place too many or too few?. J Neurosurg 2006;105:815–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tullberg M, Persson J, Petersen J, et al. Shunt surgery in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus is cost-effective-a cost utility analysis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2018;160:509–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar