OBJECTIVE: The current review was aimed to present a comprehensive overview and critical appraisal of majorly employed neuroimaging techniques for rational diagnosis and effective monitoring of the effectiveness of the employed therapeutic intervention for NPH. Moreover, a critical overview of recent developments and utilization of pharmacological agents for the treatment of hydrocephalus has also been appraised.
RESULTS: Considering the complications associated with the shunt-based surgical operations, consistent monitoring of shunting via neuroimaging techniques hold greater clinical significance. Despite having extensive applicability of MRI and CT scan, these conventional neuroimaging techniques are associated with misdiagnosis or several health risks to patients. Recent advances in MRI (i.e., Sagittal-MRI, coronal-MRI, Time-SLIP (time-spatial-labeling-inversion-pulse), PC-MRI and diffusion-tensor-imaging (DTI)) have shown promising applicability in the diagnosis of NPH. Having associated with several adverse effects with surgical interventions, non-invasive approaches (pharmacological agents) have earned greater interest of scientists, medical professional, and healthcare providers. Amongst pharmacological agents, diuretics, isosorbide, osmotic agents, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, glucocorticoids, NSAIDs, digoxin, and gold-198 have been employed for the management of NPH and prevention of secondary sensory/intellectual complications.
CONCLUSION: Employment of rational diagnostic tool and therapeutic modalities avoids misleading diagnosis and sophisticated management of hydrocephalus by efficient reduction of Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) production, reduction of fibrotic and inflammatory cascades secondary to meningitis and hemorrhage, and protection of brain from further deterioration.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, non-interventional, cohort study using data from a Japanese medical claims database. Patients with glaucoma aged ≥20 years with a first drug claim for glaucoma treatment between 01 July 2005 and 30 October 2014 and with data for > 6 months before and after this first prescription were included. The primary endpoint was duration of drug persistence among glaucoma patients with and without the use of fixed combination drugs in the year following initiation of second-line combination treatment.
RESULTS: Of 1403 patients included in the analysis, 364 (25.94%) received fixed combination drugs and 1039 (74.06%) received unfixed combination drugs as second-line treatment. Baseline characteristics were generally comparable between the groups. A total of 39.01% of patients on fixed combination drugs, compared with 41.67% of patients on unfixed combination drugs, persisted on their glaucoma drugs 12 months post second-index date. Median persistence durations for the fixed combination drugs and unfixed combination drugs groups were 6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5-8) and 7 months (95% CI 6-9), respectively. Patients who received prostaglandin analogs (PGAs) were the most persistent with their treatment (n = 99, 12.84%). Patients diagnosed with primary open-angle glaucoma were less likely to experience treatment modification (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.800, 95% CI 0.649-0.986, P = 0.036), while those diagnosed with secondary glaucoma were more likely to experience treatment modification (HR: 1.678, 95% CI 1.231-2.288, P = 0.001) compared with glaucoma suspects.
CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective claims database study, the persistence rate of second-line glaucoma combination treatment was low, with no difference in persistence between glaucoma patients receiving unfixed combination drugs compared with fixed combination drugs. Patients on PGA showed greater persistence rates compared with other treatments.