Finger tapping and verbal fluency post-tap test improvement in INPH: its value in differential diagnosis and shunt-treatment outcomes prognosis

• Published in: Acta neurochirurgica 2017-12, Vol.159 (12), p.2301-2307
• Main Authors: Liouta, Evangelia, Gatzonis, Stylianos, Kalamatianos, Theodosis, Kalyvas, Aristotelis, Koutsarnakis, Christos, Liakos, Faidon, Anagnostopoulos, Christos, Komaitis, Spyridon, Giakoumettis, Dimitris, Stranjalis, George
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer's disease; Apraxia; Apraxias - diagnosis; Apraxias - psychology; Clinical outcomes; Cognition; Cognition & reasoning; Cognitive ability; Dementia; Dementia - diagnosis; Dementia - psychology; Dementia disorders; Diagnosis; Diagnosis, Differential; Diagnostic tests; Differential diagnosis; Executive function; Executive Function - physiology; Female; Finger; Gait; Humans; Hydrocephalus; Hydrocephalus, Normal Pressure - diagnosis; Hydrocephalus, Normal Pressure - psychology; Hydrocephalus, Normal Pressure - surgery; Interventional Radiology; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Minimally Invasive Surgery; Motor task performance; Neurology; Neuropsychological Tests; Neuropsychology; Neuroradiology; Neurosurgery; Original Article - EANS Affairs; Parkinson's disease; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Psychomotor Performance - physiology; Speech - physiology; Spinal Puncture; Surgical Orthopedics; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 0001-6268; 0942-0940
• DOI: 10.1007/s00701-017-3301-2

Background Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) diagnosis is challenging as it can be mimicked by other neurological conditions, such as neurodegenerative dementia and motor syndromes. Additionally, outcomes after lumbar puncture (LP) tap test and shunt treatment may vary due to the lack of a common protocol in INPH assessment. The present study aimed to assess whether a post-LP test amelioration of frontal cognitive dysfunctions, characterizing this syndrome, can differentiate INPH from similar neurological conditions and whether this improvement can predict INPH post–shunt outcomes. Method Seventy-one consecutive patients referred for INPH suspicion and LP testing, were enrolled. According to the consensus guidelines criteria, 29 patients were diagnosed as INPH and 42 were assigned an alternative diagnosis (INPH-like group) after reviewing clinical, neuropsychological and imaging data, and before LP results. A comprehensive neuropsychological assessment for frontal executive, upper extremity fine motor functions, aphasias, apraxias, agnosias and gait evaluation were administered at baseline. Executive, fine motor functions and gait were re-examined post-LP test in all patients and post-shunt placement in INPH patients. Results Of the INPH patients, 86.2% showed cognitive amelioration in the post-LP test; in addition, all but one (97%) presented with neurocognitive and gait improvement post-shunt. Verbal phonological fluency and finger tapping task post-LP improvement predicted positive clinical outcome post-shunt. None of the INPH-like group presented with neurocognitive improvement post-LP. Conclusions Post-LP amelioration of verbal fluency and finger tapping deficits can differentiate INPH from similar disorders and predict positive post-shunt clinical outcome in INPH. This becomes of great importance when gait assessment is difficult to perform in clinical practice.