Intracranial pressure following surgery of an unruptured intracranial aneurysm-a model for normal intracranial pressure in humans.

OBJECTIVE: Optimizing the treatment of several neurosurgical and neurological disorders relies on knowledge of the intracranial pressure (ICP). However, exploration of normal ICP and intracranial pressure pulse wave amplitude (PWA) values in healthy individuals poses ethical challenges, and thus the current documentation remains scarce. This study explores ICP and PWA values for healthy adults without intracranial pathology expected to influence ICP. METHODS: Adult patients (age > 18 years) undergoing surgery for an unruptured intracranial aneurysm without any other neurological co-morbidities were included. Patients had a telemetric ICP sensor inserted, and ICP was measured in four different positions: supine, lateral recumbent, standing upright, and 45-degree sitting, at day 1, 14, 30, and 90 following the surgery. RESULTS: ICP in each position did not change with time after surgery. Median ICP was 6.7 mmHg and median PWA 2.1 mmHg in the supine position, while in the upright standing position median ICP was - 3.4 mmHg and median PWA was 1.9 mmHg. After standardization of the measurements from the transducer site to the external acoustic meatus, the median ICPmidbrain was 8.3 mmHg in the supine position and 1.2 mmHg in the upright standing position. CONCLUSION: Our study provides insights into normal ICP dynamics in healthy adults following a uncomplicated surgery for an unruptured aneurysm. These results suggest a slightly wider normal reference range for invasive intracranial pressure than previously suggested, and present the first normal values for PWA in different positions. Further studies are, however, essential to enhance our understanding of normal ICP. Trial registration The study was preregistered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT03594136) (11 July 2018).

How to define CSF overdrainage: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: Overdrainage (OD) is one of the most frequent complications related to drainage of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). It is mostly associated with valve-bearing shunt systems but should probably be considered as a risk factor in any type of CSF diversion procedure. There is extreme variation in the reported incidence of OD due to the lack of consensus on defining criteria and an unclear perception of the pathophysiology. Hence, OD is probably underreported and underestimated. The objective of this paper was to establish a definition of OD, based on a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLNE and EMBASE. Studies providing a definition or a description of diagnostic findings related to OD in ventriculoperitoneal shunt treated hydrocephalus were included. Non-English titles, abstracts and manuscripts were excluded. Extracted descriptions were graded into five groups (class I-V studies) based on how precise the terminology used to describe OD was. Class I studies were included for further analysis and characteristics of OD were extracted. The quality of included descriptions was assessed by a clinical expert panel. RESULTS: A total of 1309 studies were screened, 190 were graded into groups, and 22, which provided specific definitions or descriptions of OD, were graded as class I studies. We extracted 32 different characteristics consistent with OD (e.g., clinical symptoms, radiological signs, and syndromes). CONCLUSION: There was an overall agreement that CSF overdrainage following implantation of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt in a mixed pediatric and adult population is characterized as a persistent condition with clinically manifestations as postural dependent headache, nausea, and vomiting and/or radiological signs of slim ventricles and/or subdural collections.

Reference values for intracranial pressure and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Although widely used in the evaluation of the diseased, normal intracranial pressure and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure remain sparsely documented. Intracranial pressure is different from lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure. In addition, intracranial pressure differs considerably according to the body position of the patient. Despite this, the current reference values do not distinguish between intracranial and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressures, and body position-dependent reference values do not exist. In this study, we aim to establish these reference values. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Sciences. Methodological quality was assessed using an amended version of the Joanna Briggs Quality Appraisal Checklist. Intracranial pressure and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure were independently evaluated and subdivided into body positions. Quantitative data were presented with mean ± SD, and 90% reference intervals. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included. Nine studies reported values for intracranial pressure, while 27 reported values for the lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure. Reference values for intracranial pressure were - 5.9 to 8.3 mmHg in the upright position and 0.9 to 16.3 mmHg in the supine position. Reference values for lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure were 7.2 to 16.8 mmHg and 5.7 to 15.5 mmHg in the lateral recumbent position and supine position, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review is the first to provide position-dependent reference values for intracranial pressure and lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure. Clinically applicable reference values for normal lumbar cerebrospinal fluid pressure were established, and are in accordance with previously used reference values. For intracranial pressure, this study strongly emphasizes the scarcity of normal pressure measures, and highlights the need for further research on the matter.