Meta-Analysis of CSF Diversion Procedures and Dural Venous Sinus Stenting in the Setting of Medically Refractory Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
- PMID: 26251432
- PMCID: PMC7965019
- DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4377
Meta-Analysis of CSF Diversion Procedures and Dural Venous Sinus Stenting in the Setting of Medically Refractory Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
Abstract
Background and purpose: In medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension, optic nerve sheath fenestration or CSF shunting is considered the next line of management. Venous sinus stenosis has been increasingly recognized as a treatable cause of elevated intracranial pressure in a subset of patients. In this article, we present the results of the largest meta-analysis of optic nerve sheath fenestration, CSF shunting, and dural venous sinus stenting. This is the only article that compares these procedures, to our knowledge.
Materials and methods: We performed a PubMed search of all peer-reviewed articles from 1988 to 2014 for patients who underwent a procedure for medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension.
Results: Optic nerve sheath fenestration analysis included 712 patients. Postprocedure, there was improvement of vision in 59%, headache in 44%, and papilledema in 80%; 14.8% of patients required a repeat procedure with major and minor complication rates of 1.5% and 16.4%, respectively. The CSF diversion procedure analysis included 435 patients. Postprocedure, there was improvement of vision in 54%, headache in 80%, and papilledema in 70%; 43% of patients required at least 1 additional surgery. The major and minor complication rates were 7.6% and 32.9%, respectively. The dural venous sinus stenting analysis included 136 patients. After intervention, there was improvement of vision in 78%, headache in 83%, and papilledema in 97% of patients. The major and minor complication rates were 2.9% and 4.4%, respectively. Fourteen additional procedures were performed with a repeat procedure rate of 10.3%. Three patients had contralateral stent placement, while 8 had ipsilateral stent placement within or adjacent to the original stent. Only 3 patients required conversion to CSF diversion or 2.2% of patients with stents.
Conclusions: Patients with medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension have traditionally undergone a CSF diversion procedure as the first intervention. This paradigm may need to be re-examined, given the high technical and clinical success and low complication rates with dural venous sinus stenting.
© 2015 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.
Comment in
-
Reply.AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 Feb;37(2):E17-8. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4667. Epub 2015 Dec 17. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016. PMID: 26680460 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Stents for Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: Meta-Analyzed, Hypo-Analyzed, and In Need of a Trial.AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 Feb;37(2):E15-6. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4642. Epub 2015 Dec 17. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016. PMID: 26680461 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Friedman DI, Jacobson DM. Diagnostic criteria for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurology 2002;59:1492–95 - PubMed
-
- Durcan FJ, Corbett JJ, Wall M. The incidence of pseudotumor cerebri: population studies in Iowa and Louisiana. Arch Neurol 1988;45:875–77 - PubMed
-
- Puffer RC, Mustafa W, Lanzino G. Venous sinus stenting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a review of the literature. J Neurointerv Surg 2013;5:483–86 - PubMed
-
- Francis CE, Quiros PA. Headache management in idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Int Ophthalmol Clin 2014;54:103–14 - PubMed
-
- Wall M. The headache profile of idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Cephalalgia 1990;10:331–35 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical