HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Larner, M. J Articles by Larner, A. J Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Larner, M. J Articles by Larner, A. J

Normal pressure hydrocephalus: false positives

¹ Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, UK
² Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Liverpool, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr A J Larner, Cognitive Function Clinic, The Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Lower Lane, Fazakerley, Liverpool L9 7LJ, UK;
a.larner@thewaltoncentre.nhs.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In their informative article on idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH), Malm and Eklund ( Practical Neurology 2006;6:14–27[Free Full Text] ) discuss cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tap tests in the evaluation of suspected cases, and point out that false negatives may occur (that is, patient improves after surgery despite a negative tap test). But what about false positives (patient fails to improve after surgery despite a positive tap test)? In a patient known to us personally, a man in his seventies with progressive gait disturbance and hydrocephalus on CT scanning, improved dramatically in his walking after a CSF tap test, declining gradually once again over the next two weeks. However, he failed to improve after shunt surgery despite apparently adequate shunt function. With the benefit of hindsight, it is possible that he may have had secondary/symptomatic, rather than primary/idiopathic NPH.

Hence, we would like to ask if symptomatic NPH, . . . [Full text of this article]