TY - JOUR
T1 - Tms-evoked potentials
T2 - Neurophysiological biomarkers for diagnosis and prediction of response to ventriculoperitoneal shunt in normal pressure hydrocephalus
AU - Davidy, Tal
AU - Anis, Saar
AU - Suminski, Alexandra
AU - Zauberman, Yakov
AU - Fay-Karmon, Tsvia
AU - Saar, Adi
AU - Zifman, Noa
AU - Fogel, Hilla
AU - Abulher, Eden
AU - Lesman-Segev, Orit
AU - Hassin-Baer, Sharon
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Background: Current practice for normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) relies upon clinical presentation, imaging and invasive clinical procedures for indication of treatment with ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS). We aimed to assess the utility of a TMS-evoked potential (TEP)-based evaluation, for prediction of response to VPS in NPH, as an alternative for the cerebrospinal fluid tap test (CTT). Methods: 37 “possible iNPH” patients and 16 age-matched healthy controls (HC) were included. All subjects performed Delphi (TMS-EEG and automated analysis of TEP), in response to primary motor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal (DLPFC) stimulations. Sixteen patients underwent VPS and response was evaluated with change in modified Rankin Scale (MRS), clinical global impression of change (CGIC) regarding gait and the change on a repeated 3-meter timed up and Go (TUG) after 3 months. Results: TEP Delphi-NPH index was most successful in discrimination of iNPH responders to VPS (ROC-AUC of 0.91, p = 0.006) compared to other imaging (AUCEI = 0.58, p = 0.58; AUCTH = 0.65, p = 0.32; AUCCA = 0.83, p = 0.03) and TUG tests (AUCTUG = 0.63, p = 0.42; AUCCTT = 0.65, p = 0.35). The TEP M1 P60 and P180 latencies were earlier in responders compared to controls (pM1 P60 = 0.016, pM1 P180 = 0.009, respectively). Also, significant correlations of TEP Delphi measures were registered in comparison to the rank CGIC and magnitude of change in TUG times. Conclusions: These initial results suggest that TEPs, may be an alternative for CTT, in prediction of response to VPS in patients suspected as iNPH, exhibiting higher efficacy with reduced patient discomfort and risks, given replication of results in a larger sample and longer follow up times.
AB - Background: Current practice for normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) relies upon clinical presentation, imaging and invasive clinical procedures for indication of treatment with ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS). We aimed to assess the utility of a TMS-evoked potential (TEP)-based evaluation, for prediction of response to VPS in NPH, as an alternative for the cerebrospinal fluid tap test (CTT). Methods: 37 “possible iNPH” patients and 16 age-matched healthy controls (HC) were included. All subjects performed Delphi (TMS-EEG and automated analysis of TEP), in response to primary motor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal (DLPFC) stimulations. Sixteen patients underwent VPS and response was evaluated with change in modified Rankin Scale (MRS), clinical global impression of change (CGIC) regarding gait and the change on a repeated 3-meter timed up and Go (TUG) after 3 months. Results: TEP Delphi-NPH index was most successful in discrimination of iNPH responders to VPS (ROC-AUC of 0.91, p = 0.006) compared to other imaging (AUCEI = 0.58, p = 0.58; AUCTH = 0.65, p = 0.32; AUCCA = 0.83, p = 0.03) and TUG tests (AUCTUG = 0.63, p = 0.42; AUCCTT = 0.65, p = 0.35). The TEP M1 P60 and P180 latencies were earlier in responders compared to controls (pM1 P60 = 0.016, pM1 P180 = 0.009, respectively). Also, significant correlations of TEP Delphi measures were registered in comparison to the rank CGIC and magnitude of change in TUG times. Conclusions: These initial results suggest that TEPs, may be an alternative for CTT, in prediction of response to VPS in patients suspected as iNPH, exhibiting higher efficacy with reduced patient discomfort and risks, given replication of results in a larger sample and longer follow up times.
KW - Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus
KW - TMS Evoked Potentials
KW - Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105002257362&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111234
DO - 10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111234
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 40215911
AN - SCOPUS:105002257362
SN - 0967-5868
VL - 136
JO - Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
JF - Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
M1 - 111234
ER -