Overview
The development of ventriculomegaly (VM) after DC for severe TBI is well documented. Its incidence significantly varies among the reported series from 40 to 45% [
30,
64]. However, among the patients that develop VM following TBI, only a small percentage require the insertion of a ventriculo-peritoneal (or less frequently lumbar-peritoneal) shunt for its management [
30,
64,
95]. This discrepancy requires to differentiate the features of clinically proven hydrocephalus (HC), which requires surgical treatment, to those of VM, which refers to ex vacuo dilatation of the ventricular system resulting from brain atrophy due to severe TBI.
Even after differentiating HC from VM, the actual incidence of HC among patients underwent DC for TBI varies significantly among the published series (10–45%) [
30,
43,
70,
95]. The vast majority of the published series are retrospective studies, carrying all the weaknesses and the potential biases related to their retrospective nature. There are only two retrospective studies with prospectively collected data in the pertinent literature [
93,
95]. Moreover, the number of different criteria for diagnosis of VM or HC following post-traumatic DC may represent another factor to explain the wide range in the rate of incidence of HC [
12,
17,
30,
90].
Several predisposing factors for the development of HC following posttraumatic DC are summarized in Table
1.
Table 1
Predisposing factors for post-DC hydrocephalus
Interhemispheric hygroma development |
Subdural hygroma development |
Low GCS score upon admission* |
Increased ICP before DC |
Elderly patients |
Proximity of the DC (< 2.5 cm) to the anatomical midline |
Delayed (> 3 months) CP |
Several reported series have demonstrated an association between post-DC HC and factors including the development of an interhemispheric hygroma [
17,
42,
70,
95], or subdural hygroma [
30], severity of the initial injury as reflected by a low admission GCS score and the increased ICP during the acute course [
1,
42]. Higher risk of developing post-DC HC for younger patients [
70,
95], and for bifrontal DC in comparison to unilateral DC has been reported, although not statistically significant [
30]. A statistically significant association between distance of the DC border less than 2.5 cm to the anatomical midline and the development of HC has been reported [
17].
The time interval between the DC and the development of HC varies between the reported series, with a median time interval of 6.4 months (range 1–15) or 43.7 days (range 23.5–199), but it seems that HC takes at least 1 month to develop after DC [
70,
95]. Interestingly, the previously published series agreed on the finding that the vast majority of patients (> 80%) who develop an interhemispheric hygroma after a DC will develop HC within 50 days from the DC [
17,
42,
70,
95].
The development of specific diagnostic criteria for HC in the context of post-decompression VM should be further studied. The establishment of the diagnosis of post-DC HC requires both the presence of clinical symptoms and signs, along with radiologically proven VM [
70].
However, it is unlikely that the post-DC HC will present with the typical clinical triad observed for the idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (cognitive deterioration, gait abnormalities, and urinary incontinence), as the underlying TBI is likely to have caused severe neurological impairments that submerge this typical symptomatology [
97]. Thus, HC should be suspected, in the presence of VM, when patients fail to have the expected recovery following the initial event (exceedingly slow or arrested recovery) or when preexisting cognitive and/or motor deficits begin to deteriorate (progressive neurological deterioration) or even in case of atypical symptoms of new onset such as seizures [
15].
The onset of the aspecific HC symptomatology often takes place during the post-acute phase, where patients with DC are often admitted to specialized intensive rehabilitation, in view of the complex disabilities following TBI [
45,
54,
66]. As the clinical presentation of HC is often subtle, there is a need to document the arrested recovery or the progressive neurological deterioration caused by HC using clinical scales. These scales should be able to assess the patient’s functional status over time and that are enough responsive to the subtle and mild changes of the patient’s neurological condition. For instance, the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is definitely appropriate to detect even subtle neurological changes in patients with post-traumatic DC affected by a disorder of consciousness (DOC) [
84]. However, the same scale is not appropriate for patients who have emerged from DOC being in a post-traumatic confusional state. Indeed, clinical scales which are targeted to the functional level of the patients should be used. In this respect, an outcome scale such as the Glasgow Outcome Scale, even in its extended form, is unlikely to be enough sensitive to change to capture these subtle changes and, thus, its use cannot be recommended. For these reasons, the operationalization of the diagnostic criteria for HC in the context of post-decompression VM should be further studied.
However, early recognition of post-DC HC is of paramount importance, since its proper management can improve the patient’s neurological status and her/his overall outcome [
54].
All previous reports and reviews agreed on the fact that the development of post-DC HC is associated with worse outcome [
17,
30,
42,
70]. Previous series have shown that delayed restorative CP (more than 3 months after the DC) is associated with HC [
70]. However, other series concluded that timing of CP was not associated with the development of HC [
1,
30,
42]. A more recent systematic review concluded that CP within 90 days after DC in TBI patients alone was associated with a lower incidence of hydrocephalus [
71].
The disappearance of VM after CP is well documented. Thus, the existing controversies about the proper management for HC and CP regard the timing of CSF diversion with respect to the cranial reconstruction. When a CSF shunt is required, no evidence exists in the literature regarding the best time option (before, synchronously, or after CP) for insertion [
44,
51,
56,
57,
60,
70,
73,
93].
A CP before the VPS may prolong and intensify the effect of HC to the brain [
98], but at the same time may increase the technical difficulty of a subsequent CP [
59]. In a previously published study, a higher incidence of anaesthesia-related and prophylactic antibiotic–related complications is reported [
40]. A CP performed after VPS has been reported to be associated with higher complication rate, and an increased shunt revision rate [
59]. In cases of simultaneous performance of VPS and CP, higher perioperative complications, including higher infection rates, have been reported [
26,
40], although other reports found the incidence to be similar [
67].
Based on a number of case series, it has been suggested that programmable shunts could be effective in the management of HC following post-traumatic DC. Nevertheless, a fixed pressure-valve is a well-recognized treatment in socio-economic environments with limited resources. This is especially significant given the availability of a number of lower-cost fixed-pressure shunts that may be more useful in the setting of lower resources [
40,
59].