Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

LetterLetter

White-Matter Hyperintensities and Subcortical Infarcts as Predictors of Shunt Surgery Outcome

Louis R. Caplan
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2002, 23 (5) 894-895;
Louis R. Caplan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Tullberg et al (1) concluded that the presence of deep white-matter hyperintensities and subcortical infarcts in patients with “normal pressure hydrocephalus” were not predictors of a poor outcome after shunt surgery. They further argued that white-matter abnormalities should not be used to exclude patients from surgery. I urge readers to be very cautious in accepting these conclusions from their study.

Subcortical infarcts and gliosis often render the cerebral white matter rubbery to palpation (2–4). The resiliency and support function of the tissues can be affected. Our experience and that of others is that ventricular shunting in patients with Binswanger-type subcortical disease leads to only temporary improvement. Symptoms and signs gradually return to their pre-shunting levels. The altered support of the ventricles does not maintain the reduced ventricular size. Furthermore, the microvascular disease often progresses, with worsening of neurologic signs (2–4).

Unfortunately, Tullberg and colleagues evaluated their 34 patients at 3 months after shunting. This is far too soon to determine if the surgery has any long-term benefits. Readers of the AJNR and I would be interested to know of any long-term follow-up in these patients.

Care must be used to separate periventricular, diffuse, smooth hyperintensities from irregular intensities around the frontal and occipital horns (which are often attributable to the transependymal passage of CSF). The latter findings are predictive of the response to shunting and are not caused by microvascular disease. Irregular white-matter lesions with extension limited to the corona radiata and centrum semiovale are attributable to microvascular disease that are predictive of only a temporary, limited benefit of surgery. The alteration in the physical properties of the supporting white-matter periventricular tissues in patients with microvascular (Binswanger) disease contribute to white-matter atrophy and ventricular enlargement.

References

  1. ↵
    Tullberg M, Jensen C, Ekholm S, Wikkelso C. Normal pressure hydrocephalus: vascular white matter changes on MR images must not exclude patients from shunt surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:1665–1673
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Caplan LR, Schoene WC. Clinical features of subcortical arteriosclerotic encephalopathy (Binswanger’s disease). Neurology 1978;28:1206–1215
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. Fisher CM. Binswanger’s encephalopathy: a review. J Neurol 1989;236:65–79
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Caplan LR. Binswanger’s disease revisited. Neurology 1995;45:626–633
    FREE Full Text

Reply:

In his letter to the editor, Dr Caplan raises some valuable questions regarding the longer-term follow-up of the patients included in our recently published article (1). His experience is that, in patients with Binswanger-type subcortical disease, surgery leads to only temporary improvement. He urges the readers to be cautious in accepting our conclusions that vascular white-matter abnormalities must not be used to exclude patients from shunt surgery. He argues that our postoperative evaluation at 3 months after shunt surgery was performed too soon to evaluate the long-term benefit of the surgery.

We do agree that the long-term result of shunt surgery in patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is an important subject. We are in the process of completing the data analysis in a 5-year follow-up study of patients with NPH who underwent shunt surgery; these data will be published later. In our experience, however, most patients that improved 3 months after shunt surgery also maintained this improved at 12 months after surgery, unless shunt dysfunction occurred (2). During the past few years, we performed a quantified, clinical, 12-month postoperative evaluation of our patients. In the present study, 25 of the 34 patients included improved 3 months after surgery. Of these, 23 were re-evaluated 12–15 months after surgery (two patients refused re-evaluation). In 22 of the 23, the improvement remained the same as it was at the 3-month postoperative evaluation. The patient whose improvement was not maintained at 12 months after surgery had multiple cerebrovascular incidents, which explained the deterioration.

The group of patients with NPH that causes most diagnostic problems is the one with concomitant cerebrovascular disease. A shunt operation probably does not halt the progress of microangiopathy or prevent new cerebrovascular incidents. However, even a short period of improvement can be beneficial to an older patient, improving his or her quality of life for months or years.

References

  1. ↵
    Tullberg M, Jensen C, Ekholm S, Wikkelso C. Normal pressure hydrocephalus: vascular white matter changes on MR images must not exclude patients from shunt surgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:1665–1673
  2. ↵
    Larsson A, Jensen C, Bilting M, Ekholm S, Stephensen H, Wikkelso C. Does the shunt opening pressure influence the effect of shunt surgery in normal pressure hydrocephalus? Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1992;117:15–22
    PubMed
  • Copyright © American Society of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 23 (5)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 23, Issue 5
1 May 2002
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
White-Matter Hyperintensities and Subcortical Infarcts as Predictors of Shunt Surgery Outcome
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
Louis R. Caplan
White-Matter Hyperintensities and Subcortical Infarcts as Predictors of Shunt Surgery Outcome
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2002, 23 (5) 894-895;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
White-Matter Hyperintensities and Subcortical Infarcts as Predictors of Shunt Surgery Outcome
Louis R. Caplan
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2002, 23 (5) 894-895;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Reply:
  • Brain AVM’s Nidus: What if We Hadn’t Understood Anything?
  • Letter to the Editor regarding “Automated Volumetric Software in Dementia: Help or Hindrance to the Neuroradiologist?”
Show more Letters

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire