Interventions for idiopathic intracranial hypertension

Rory J Piper; Aristotelis V Kalyvas; Adam MH Young; Mark A Hughes; Aimun AB Jamjoom; Ioannis P Fouyas

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003434.pub3

Intervenciones para la hipertensión intracraneal idiopática

Collapse all Expand all

References

References to studies included in this review

Jump to:

excluded studies
ongoing studies
additional references
other published versions

Ball AK, Howman A, Wheatley K, Burdon MA, Matthews T, Jacks AS, et al. A randomised controlled trial of treatment for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Journal of Neurology 2011;258(5):874‐81.

Digre KB, Bruce BB, McDermott MP, Galetta KM, Balcer LJ, Wall M. Quality of life in idiopathic intracranial hypertension at diagnosis IIH Treatment Trial results. Neurology 2015;84(24):2449‐56.

Lam B, Falardeau J, Fletcher W, Granadier R, Longmuir R, Patel A, et al. Risk factors for poor visual outcome in idiopathic intracranial hypertension patients with mild visual loss. 67th American Academy of Neurology Annual Meeting; 2015 April 18‐25, Washington DC.

NORDIC Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Study Group Writing Committee, Wall M, McDermott MP, Kieburtz KD, Corbett JJ, Feldon SE, et al. Effect of acetazolamide on visual function in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension and mild visual loss: the idiopathic intracranial hypertension treatment trial. JAMA 2014;311(16):1641‐51.

References to studies excluded from this review

Jump to:

included studies
ongoing studies
additional references
other published versions

Abubaker K, Ali Z, Raza K, Bolger C, Rawluk D, O'Brien D. Idiopathic intracranial hypertension: lumboperitoneal shunts versus ventriculoperitoneal shunts ‐ case series and literature review. British Journal of Neurosurgery 2011;25(1):94‐9.

Aguilar Perez M, Kurre K, Fischer S, Horward‐Rizea D, Unsold R, Bazner H, et al. [Endovascular treatment in "Bening" intracranial hypertension. Clinical result and long‐term follow‐up]. Neuroradiology. 37th European Society of Neuroradiology Annual Meeting; 2013 28 Sept‐1 Oct; Frankfurt. 2013.

Ahmed RM, Wilkinson M, Parker GD, Thurtell MJ, Macdonald J, McCluskey PJ, et al. Transverse sinus stenting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a review of 52 patients and of model predictions. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2011;32(8):1408‐14.

Ahmed RM, Zmudzki F, Parker GD, Owler BK, Halmagyi GM. Transverse sinus stenting for pseudotumor cerebri: a cost comparison with CSF shunting. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2014;35(5):952‐8.

Albuquerque FC, Dashti SR, Hu YC, Newman CB, Teleb M, McDougall CG, et al. Intracranial venous sinus stenting for benign intracranial hypertension: clinical indications, technique, and preliminary results. World Neurosurgery 2011;75(5‐6):648‐52.

Alsuhaibani AH, Carter KD, Nerad JA, Lee AG. Effect of optic nerve sheath fenestration on papilledema of the operated and the contralateral nonoperated eyes in idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Ophthalmology 2011;118(2):412‐4.

Bussière M, Falero R, Nicolle D, Proulx A, Patel V, Pelz D. Unilateral transverse sinus stenting of patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension. AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology 2010;31(4):645‐50.

Bynke G, Zemack G, Bynke H, Romner B. Ventriculoperitoneal shunting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurology 2004;63(7):1314‐6.

Çelebisoy N, Gökçay F, Sirin H, Akyürekli O. Treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: topiramate vs acetazolamide, an open‐label study. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 2007;116(5):322‐7.

Egan RJ, Meredith HE, Coulston JE, Bennetto L, Morgan JD, Norton SA. The effects of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding on idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Obesity Surgery 2011;21(2):161‐6.

Fonseca PL, Rigamonti D, Miller NR, Subramanian PS. Visual outcomes of surgical intervention for pseudotumour cerebri: optic nerve sheath fenestration versus cerebrospinal fluid diversion. British Journal of Ophthalmology 2014;90(10):1360‐3.

Gates P, Christensen J. Immediate resolution of idiopathic intracranial hypertension with drainage of CSF at low pressure. www.neurology.org/cgi/content/meeting_abstract/80/1_MeetingAbstracts/P02.246 (accessed 5 April 2014).

Halmagyi M, Parker G, Thurtell M, Macdonald J, Ahmed R, Wilkinson M, et al. Management of idiopathic intracranial hypertension with transverse sinus stenting. Journal of Neurology; Conference: 20th Meeting of the European Neurological Society; 2010 June 19‐23; Berlin. 2010.

Google Scholar

Herzau V, Baykal HE. Long‐term results of optic nerve sheath fenestration in pseudotumor cerebri [Langzeitergebnisse nach optikusscheidenfensterung bei pseudotumor cerebri]. Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde 1998;213(3):154‐60.

Heyman J, Amato‐Watkins A, Te Water Naude J, Gibbon F, Leach P. Frameless stereotactic navigation for ventriculoperitoneal shunt insertion for the treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension in children. 2013 Spring Meeting of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons; 2013 May 22‐24; Sheffield. 2013.

Google Scholar

Johnson LN, Krohel GB, Madsen RW, March GA. The role of weight loss and acetazolamide in the treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension (pseudotumor cerebri). Ophthalmology 1998;105(12):2313‐7.

Kandasamy J, Hayhurst C, Clark S, Jenkinson MD, Byrne P, Karabatsou K, et al. Electromagnetic stereotactic ventriculoperitoneal CSF shunting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a successful step forward?. World Neurosurgery 2011;75(1):155‐60.

Lin J, Cole D, Flatt M, Kroeter B, Warren S, Morris M. Design and testing of a 'Bi‐corporal' pump for the treatment of hydrocephalus and idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics; Conference: 35th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Pediatric Neurosurgeons; 2012 Jan 31‐Feb 3; Rio Grande. 2012.

Google Scholar

NCT01407809. Venous sinus stenting for idiopathic intracranial hypertension refractory to medical therapy (VSSIIH). clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01407809 (accessed 14 January 2015).

NCT02143258. Stenting of venous sinus stenosis for medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02143258 (accessed 15 January 2015).

Nemeth GG, McHenry JG, Tinoosh F, Spoor TC, Blum LR. Comparison of acetazolamide, shunts, and refenestration for failed decompressions for pseudotumor cerebri. American Academy of Ophthalmology. 1995:140.

Google Scholar

Nithyanandam S, Manayath GJ, Battu RR. Optic nerve sheath decompression for visual loss in intracranial hypertension: report from a tertiary care center in South India. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology 2008;56(2):115‐20.

Owler BK, Parker G, Halmagyi GM, Dunne VG, Grinnell V, McDowell D, et al. Pseudotumor cerebri syndrome: Venous sinus obstruction and its treatment with stent placement. Journal of Neurosurgery 2003;98(5):1045‐5.

Raoof N, Panesar H, McMullan J, Sharrack B, Pepper IM, Hickman SJ. Outcome from CSF diversion surgery for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neuro‐Ophthalmology. Conference: 18th International Neuro‐Ophthalmology Society; 2010 June 19‐22; Lyon. 2010.

Google Scholar

Salman MS, Kirkham FJ, MacGregor DL. Idiopathic "benign" intracranial hypertension: case series and review. Journal of Child Neurology 2001;16(7):465‐70.

Sesenna E, Monteverdi R, Gandolfi S, Nizzoli V. Optic nerve sheath decompression (perioptic meningectomy) through a lateral orbitotomy approach: Indications and technique. Rivista di Neurobiologia 1996;42(4):313‐21.

Google Scholar

Sinclair AJ, Burdon MA, Nightingale PG, Ball AK, Good P, Matthews TD, et al. Low energy diet and intracranial pressure in women with idiopathic intracranial hypertension: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2010;340:c2701.

Sinclair A, Mulla Y, Markey K, Mitchell J, Patel S. Headache determines quality of life in idiopathic intracranial hypertension.. Journal of Headache and Pain Conference: 4th European Headache and Migraine Trust International Congress. Copenhagen, 2014.

Google Scholar

Sugerman HJ, Felton WL, Sismanis A, Kellum JM, DeMaria EJ, Sugerman EL. Gastric surgery for pseudotumor cerebri associated with severe obesity. Annals of Surgery 1999;229(5):634‐40.

Sugerman HJ, Felton III WL, Sismanis A, Saggi BH, Doty JM, Blocher C, et al. Continuous negative abdominal pressure device to treat pseudotumor cerebri. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 2001;25(4):486‐90.

Tacke U, Budde J, Korinthenberg R. Pseudotumor cerebri under prednisolone treatment for infantile spasms. Neuropediatrics. Conference: 38th Annual Meeting of the Society of Neuropediatrics; 2012 Apr 19‐22; Munster. 2012.

Google Scholar

Tarnaris A, Toma AK, Watkins LD, Kitchen ND. Is there a difference in outcomes of patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension with the choice of cerebrospinal fluid diversion site: a single centre experience. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 2011;113(6):477‐9.

Teleb MS, Cziep ME, Issa M, Lazzaro M, Asif K, Hun Hong S, et al. Stenting and angioplasty for idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a case series with clinical, angiographic, ophthalmological, complication, and pressure reporting. Journal of Neuroimaging 2015;25(1):72‐80.

Warman R. Management of pseudotumor cerebri in children. International Pediatrics 2000;15(3):147‐50.

Google Scholar

References to ongoing studies

Jump to:

included studies
excluded studies
additional references
other published versions

NCT02017444. Lowering intracranial pressure in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: assessing the therapeutic efficacy and safety of an 11β‐hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 inhibitor (AZD4017). Phase II study. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02017444 (accessed 16 January 2015).

ISRCTN40152829. Bariatric surgery versus a community weight loss programme for the sustained treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN40152829 (accessed 23 July 2015).

NCT02124486. A randomised controlled trial of bariatric surgery versus a community weight loss programme for the sustained treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: the IIH:WT trial. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02124486 (accessed 16 January 2015).

Additional references

Jump to:

included studies
excluded studies
ongoing studies
other published versions

Corbett JJ, Savino PJ, Thompson HS, Kansu T, Schatz NJ, Orr LS, et al. Visual loss in pseudotumor cerebri. Follow‐up of 57 patients from five to 41 years and a profile of 14 patients with permanent severe visual loss. Archives of Neurology 1982;39(8):461‐74.

Donahue SP. Recurrence of idiopathic intracranial hypertension after weight loss: the carrot craver. American Journal of Ophthalmology 2000;130(6):850‐1.

Durcan FJ, Corbett JJ, Wall M. The incidence of pseudotumor cerebri. Population studies in Iowa and Louisiana. Archives of Neurology 1988;45(8):875‐7.

Friedman DI, Jacobson DM. Diagnostic criteria for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurology 2002;59(10):1492‐5.

Galgano MA, Deshaies EM. An update on the management of pseudotumor cerebri. Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 2013;115(3):252‐9.

Giuseffi V, Wall M, Siegel PZ, Rojas PB. Symptoms and disease associations in idiopathic intracranial hypertension (pseudotumor cerebri): a case‐control study. Neurology 1991;41(2 Pt 1):239‐44.

Glanville JM, Lefebvre C, Miles JN, Camosso‐Stefinovic J. How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2006;94(2):130‐6.

Macmasters University. Computer program on www.gradepro.org. 2014: Macmasters University, (accessed 20 March 2015).

Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (editors). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Ireland B, Corbett JJ, Wallace RB. The search for causes of idiopathic intracranial hypertension. A preliminary case‐control study. Archives of Neurology 1990;47(3):315‐20.

Johnston I, Paterson A. Benign intracranial hypertension. I. Diagnosis and prognosis. Brain 1974;97(2):289‐300.

Johnston I, Paterson A. Benign intracranial hypertension. II. CSF pressure and circulation. Brain 1974;97(2):301‐12.

Karahalios DG, Rekate HL, Khayata MH, Apostolides PJ. Elevated intracranial venous pressure as a universal mechanism in pseudotumor cerebri of varying etiologies. Neurology 1996;46(1):198‐202.

Klein A, Stern N, Osher E, Kliper E, Kesler A. Hyperandrogenism is associated with earlier age of onset of idiopathic intracranial hypertension in women. Current Eye Research 2013;38(9):972‐6.

Lipton HL, Michelson PE. Pseudotumor cerebri syndrome without papilledema. JAMA 1972;220(12):1591‐2.

Lochhead J, Elston JS. Doxycycline induced intracranial hypertension. BMJ 2003;326(7390):641‐2.

Mathew NT, Ravishankar K, Sanin LC. Coexistence of migraine and idiopathic intracranial hypertension without papilloedema. Neurology 1996;46(5):1226–30.

Maxner CE, Freedman MI, Corbett JJ. Asymmetric papilledema and visual loss in pseudotumour cerebri. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 1987;14(4):593‐6.

Google Scholar

Phillips PH. Pediatric pseudotumor cerebri. International Ophthalmology Clinics 2012;52(3):51‐9, xii.

Quincke H. Über Meningitis serosa und verwandte Zustände [German]. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Nervenheilkunde 1896;9(3‐4):149‐68.

Google Scholar

Radhakrishnan K, Ahlskog JE, Cross SA, Kurland LT, O'Fallon WM. Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (pseudotumor cerebri). Descriptive epidemiology in Rochester, Minnesota, 1976 to 1990. Archives of Neurology 1993;50(1):78‐80.

Radhakrishnan K, Thacker AK, Bohlaga NH, Maloo JC, Gerryo SE. Epidemiology of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a prospective and case‐control study. Journal of the Neurological Sciences 1993;116(1):18‐28.

Radhakrishnan K, Ahlskog JE, Garrity JA, Kurland LT. Idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 1994;69(2):169‐80.

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.

Rowe FJ, Sarkies NJ. Assessment of visual function in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a prospective study. Eye 1998;12(Pt 1):111‐8.

Sher NA, Wirtschafter J, Shapiro SK, See C, Shapiro I. Unilateral papilledema in 'benign' intracranial hypertension (pseudotumor cerebri). JAMA 1983;250(17):2346‐7.

Sugerman HJ, DeMaria EJ, Felton WL, Nakatsuka M, Sismanis A. Increased intra‐abdominal pressure and cardiac filling pressures in obesity‐associated pseudotumor cerebri. Neurology 1997;49(2):507‐11.

Tabassi A, Salmasi AH, Jalali M. Serum and CSF vitamin A concentrations in idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurology 2005;64(11):1893‐6.

Wall M, George D. Idiopathic intracranial hypertension. A prospective study of 50 patients. Brain 1991;114(Pt 1A):155‐80.

Warner JE, Bernstein PS, Yemelyanov A, Alder SC, Farnsworth ST, Digre KB. Vitamin A in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with and without idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Annals of Neurology 2002;52(5):647‐50.

Warner JE, Larson AJ, Bhosale P, Digre KB, Henley C, Alder SC, et al. Retinol‐binding protein and retinol analysis in cerebrospinal fluid and serum of patients with and without idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Journal of Neuro‐Ophthalmology 2007;27(4):258‐62.

Weisberg LA. Benign intracranial hypertension. Medicine 1975;54(3):197‐207.

References to other published versions of this review

Jump to:

included studies
excluded studies
ongoing studies
additional references

Lueck C, McIlwaine G. Interventions for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003434]

Lueck C, McIlwaine G. Interventions for idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003434.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Jump to:

excluded studies
ongoing studies

Ball 2011

Methods	Multicentre, open‐label, parallel‐group RCT.
Participants	Participants had IIH that met Friedman's criteria (Friedman 2002). 50 participants from six UK centres. Two arms: 25 randomised to treatment with acetazolamide and 25 randomised to placebo.
Interventions	Participants were randomised to either the acetazolamide group or the placebo group. All participants were encouraged to lose weight.
Outcomes	Measured at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Primary outcomes were measured as an aggregate score (out of 15) on final visit (each outcome measure was ranked as being: absent (0); present, stable (1); deteriorating (2)): Headache. Tinnitus. Visual obscurations. Visual acuity. Optic disc appearance. Visual field. Secondary outcomes (and methods): Headache (10‐point scale). Tinnitus (subjective presence versus absence). Visual acuity (LogMAR chart). Visual obscurations (absent, present, or deteriorating). Visual fields (automated Humphrey perimetry). Contrast sensitivity (Pelli‐Robson chart). Papilloedema. Anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Patient rated health status (EuroQoL and Short Form 36). Right and left eye data were reported separately.
Notes	In addition, at 12 months, clinicians were asked to select the term that best described the participant from the following options: IIH in remission. Active IIH improving. Active IIH but stable. Active IIH deteriorating. Date study conducted: Participants were followed until 12 months. No dates reported. Funding: Department of Neurology, University of Birmingham. Conflict of interest: None declared. Trial registration ID: EudraCT number 2004‐001595‐40.
*Risk of bias*
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Participants randomised by computer‐generated random list. No difference in baseline characteristics detected between arms.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Neither participant or treating clinician was masked to allocation. Allocation was communicated to treating clinicians via telephone.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Neither participant or treating clinician was masked to allocation. Dosing schedules for acetazolamide decided by prescribing clinician.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	No masking of assessor reported.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Five participants from the placebo arm started on acetazolamide therapy. Two participants (one from each of the two arms) underwent surgical intervention. 12 participants from the acetazolamide arm discontinued treatment during the study period.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Primary outcome data provided in full. Data not provided for anxiety, depression, patient reported health status assessment.

Wall 2014

Methods	Multicentre, double‐masked, parallel‐group RCT
Participants	165 participants from 38 North America centres (86 patients in the acetazolamide group and 79 placebo controls). 69 (80%) and 57 (72%) participants completed follow‐up, respectively. Participants met the modified Dandy criteria for IIH and were required to have mild visual loss with a PMD between −2 dB and −7 dB. Participants were also required to be between the ages of 18 to 60, have bilateral papilloedema and have elevated CSF opening pressure.
Interventions	Participants were randomised to either the acetazolamide group or the placebo group. The RCT compared maximally tolerated dosage of acetazolamide (up to 4 g/d) versus matching placebo for six months. Both groups were put on a low‐sodium weight‐reduction diet.
Outcomes	A study eye was decided: this was the eye with poorer visual acuity. Measurement of outcomes was performed at baseline, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 months (apart from HIT‐6 and quality of life, which were only at six months). Primary outcomes (and methods): Visual fields (change in PMD) in eye with most severe visual loss. Secondary outcomes (and methods): Visual fields (PMD) in least affected eye. Papilloedema grade (Frisén scale). Visual acuity. Visual quality of life (VFQ‐25). 6‐item headache impact test (HIT‐6). Quality of life (36‐Item Short Form Health Survey). CSF pressure. Weight. Vital signs. Laboratory results.
Notes	Date study conducted: Enrollment started in March 2010 and patients were followed until June 2013. Funding: National Eye Institute (NEI) grants 1U10EY017281‐01A1, DCBC 1U10EY017387‐01A1, ARRA for NORDIC 3U10EY017281‐01A1S1, and DCBC 1U10EY017387‐01A1S1, and supplements for NORDIC 3U10EY017281‐01A1S2. Conflict of interest: Two doctors reported association with several external companies. Trial registration ID: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01003639.
*Risk of bias*
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation was performed per site, but the method has not been described.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Both participants and clinicians were masked to allocation.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Robust masking policy with the managing staff blinded to treatment status except for programmer who generated the randomization plan, a statistician and a member of staff involved with packaging the drugs.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	As above.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	19% withdrawal rate. In the treatment group 16 patients withdrew for the following reasons: lost to follow‐up (6), withdrew consent (4), time commitment (3), desired active treatment (1), moved (1), and treatment failure later adjudicated to be performance failure (1). Sixteen patients in the placebo group were withdrawn for the following reasons: lost to follow‐up (9), time commitment (5), adverse event (1), needed disallowed medication (1).
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Data provided on all the secondary outcomes.

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Jump to:

included studies
ongoing studies

Study	Reason for exclusion
Abubaker 2011	Retrospective review of 25 patients treated with either lumboperitoneal shunt or ventriculoperitoneal shunt.
Aguilar Perez 2013	Prospective study of 29 patients undergoing endovascular treatment of IIH. No control group.
Ahmed 2011	No control group. Retrospective study of 52 patients with IIH and venous sinus stenosis treated with transverse sinus stenting.
Ahmed 2014	Retrospective analysis of 86 adults with IIH who underwent transverse sinus stenting compared with 110 children treated with CSF shunting for hydrocephalus.
Albuquerque 2011	No control group. Retrospective review of 19 patients who underwent venous sinus stenting.
Alsuhaibani 2011	Retrospective review of 78 patients who underwent optic nerve fenestration and 20 control patients who did not.
Bussière 2010	No control group. Retrospective review of 13 female patients who underwent venous sinus stenting.
Bynke 2004	No control group. Retrospective study. 17 patients treated with ventriculo‐peritoneal shunting.
Egan 2011	No control group. Prospective study of four patients who underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.
Fonseca 2014	Case series of 33 patients undergoing either optic nerve sheath fenestration or cerebrospinal fluid diversion. No control group.
Gates 2013	No control group. Prospective following of seven patients and retrospective review of a different six patients. Total of 13 patients treated with CSF drainage at low pressure.
Halmagyi 2010	No control group. Prospective study of 38 patients treated with venous sinus stenting.
Herzau 1998	No control group. Late review of 14 patients (23 eyes) treated by optic nerve sheath fenestration.
Heyman 2013	No control group. Retrospective review of 10 children treated with ventriculo‐peritoneal shunt (VPS) insertion using frameless stereotaxy.
Johnson 1998	No control group. Retrospective study. 15 patients treated with acetazolamide and weight loss.
Kandasamy 2011	No control group. Retrospective review and three‐year prospective follow‐up of 17 patients treated with custom‐designed electromagnetic image‐guided ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement.
Lin 2012	Technical validation of a novel 'bi‐corporal' pump to provide intermittent CSF drainage.
NCT01407809	No control group. Prospective trial of venous sinus stenting in IIH patients refractory to medical therapy.
NCT02143258	No control group. Single assignment trial of venous sinus stenting for refractory IIH.
Nemeth 1995	Retrospective review of the outcomes after three years in 39 cases of refenestration, 15 cases of acetazolamide and 14 cases of neurosurgical shunt insertion.
Nithyanandam 2008	No controls. Retrospective review of 21 patients treated with optic nerve sheath decompression.
Owler 2003	No control group. 4 patients treated with endoluminal stent insertion into transverse venous sinus.
Raoof 2010	Retrospective review of 31 patients treated with CSF diversion surgery.
Salman 2001	Retrospective review of 32 patients.
Sesenna 1996	No control group. 8 patients (10 eyes) treated with optic nerve sheath fenestration.
Sinclair 2010	Prospective cohort study following 25 women adhering to a low energy diet.
Sinclair 2014	Prospective cohort study investigating outcomes before and after weight loss. No control group.
Sugerman 1999	No control group. 24 obese patients underwent surgery for weight loss.
Sugerman 2001	No control group, treatment not standardised, numbers small. 7 patients treated with external device to generate negative intra‐abdominal pressure.
Tacke 2012	Single case report.
Tarnaris 2011	Retrospective review of 34 patients who underwent CSF fluid diversion.
Teleb 2015	Case series of 18 patients. No control group.
Warman 2000	Retrospective review of 22 patients.
Çelebisoy 2007	No placebo control group. No randomisation: 41 patients alternately allocated to treatment with acetazolamide or topiramate.

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

Jump to:

included studies
excluded studies

NCT02017444

Trial name or title	Lowering Intracranial Pressure in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: Assessing the Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of an 11β‐hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase Type 1 Inhibitor (AZD4017). Phase II Study.
Methods	Double‐blind, parallel assignment RCT
Participants	Female participants between 18 and 55 years. Diagnosis of IIH by the Modified Dandy criteria with: acute (< six months) active disease (papilloedema) raised ICP > 25 cmH2O) normal brain imaging (either magnetic resonance venography or computerised tomography with venography).
Interventions	AZD4017 (11b‐HSD1 inhibitor) 400 mg tablet twice daily for 12 weeks versus matched placebo tablet twice‐daily for 12 weeks
Outcomes	Primary outcome measures: ICP measured by lumbar puncture. Secondary outcome measures: IIH symptoms (presence or absence of tinnitus, visual loss, diplopia, visual obscurations, and headache). Visual function (visual acuity, visual fields and contrast sensitivity). Papilloedema. Anthropological measurements (blood pressure, body mass index, waist/hip ratio, DXA scan). Adverse events. Other outcome measures: AZD4017 assay levels in blood and CSF. Glucocorticoid metabolites. HPA‐associated hormone levels. Fat mass distribution. Fat/skin 11β‐HSD1 activity. Systemic 11β‐HSD1 activity (1st pass metabolism). Adipocyte gene expression. CSF inflammatory markers.
Starting date	January 2014
Contact information	Alexandra Sinclair; [email protected]
Notes	NCT02017444

NCT02124486

Trial name or title	A Randomised Controlled Trial of Bariatric Surgery Versus a Community Weight Loss Programme for the Sustained Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: the IIH:WT Trial
Methods	Open‐label, parallel assignment RCT
Participants	Inclusion criteria: Female IIH participants. Aged between 18 and 55 years. Diagnosed according to the modified Dandy criteria. Chronic disease (> 6 months duration). Active disease (papilloedema [Frisen grade ≥ 1]). Significantly raised ICP > 25 cmH2O). No evidence of venous sinus thrombosis (magnetic resonance or computed tomography imaging and venography as noted at diagnosis). BMI > 35 kg/m². Participants must have tried other non‐surgical treatments to lose weight but have not been able to achieve or maintain weight loss for at least 6 months.
Interventions	Patients will be assigned to one of four arms: Active comparator: patients will be given vouchers at baseline, 3, 6 and 9 months that exempt them from paying for a local Weight Watchers diet regimen. Experimental: patients randomised to the bariatric surgery arm will be referred to the bariatric surgery pathway. No intervention: matched obese control group will undergo the same baseline visit as the main trial participants and then exit the study. No intervention: five patients will undergo double baseline magnetic resonance scans to validate the novel sequences being used in the main trial.
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: ICP (12 months). Secondary outcomes: Long‐term follow‐up of ICP (24 and 60 months). IIH symptoms, including headache and need for analagesia. Visual function (visual acuity, visual fields, contrast sensitivity and colour vision). Papilloedema. Anthropological measures. Quality of life. Referrals to CSF shunting procedures and optic nerve sheath fenestration. Health economics, including cost‐effectiveness. Other outcome measures: Biomarkers. MRI.
Starting date	March 2014
Contact information	Alexandra Sinclair; [email protected]
Notes

Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Navigate to figure in ReviewOpen in new tab

Table 1. Reduction in vision according to change in perimetric mean deviation

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI) adjusted for centre, baseline value of outcome and baseline papilloedema grade, with multiple imputation for missing data
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N
Wall 2014: Change in perimetric mean deviation (decibels) between baseline and 6 months	1.43	2.23	86	0.71	2.49	69	0.71 (0 to 1.43)
Abbreviations: MD = mean difference; SD = standard deviation; CI = confidence interval.

Table 1. Reduction in vision according to change in perimetric mean deviation

Navigate to table in Review

Table 2. Reduction in vision according to change in logMAR acuity

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI)
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N	MD (95% CI)
Ball 2011: Change in logMAR acuity in the right eye between baseline and 12 months	Not reported	Not reported	21	Not reported	Not reported	20	0.04 (‐0.08, 0.16)
Ball 2011: Change in logMAR acuity in the left eye between baseline and 12 months	Not reported	Not reported	21	Not reported	Not reported	20	0.03 (‐0.09, 0.15)
Wall 2014^a: Change in visual acuity (number of correct letters) between baseline and 6 months	2.65	Not reported (SE 0.49)	^b	2.64	Not reported (SE 0.51)	^b	0.01 (‐1.45, 1.46)
^aIn Wall 2014 MD adjusted for centre, baseline value of outcome and baseline papilloedema grade. ^bIt is unclear how many patients were included in these analyses. Abbreviations: MD = mean difference; SD = standard deviation; CI = confidence interval; SE = standard error.

Table 2. Reduction in vision according to change in logMAR acuity

Navigate to table in Review

Table 3. Reduction in patients with visual loss according to change in logMAR acuity

Outcome	Acetalomazide		Placebo		OR (95% CI)
	n	N	n	N
Ball 2011: Visual loss (logMAR 0.2 or more) at 12 months	0	21	2	20	0.17 (0.01, 3.82)
Abbreviations: MD = mean difference; SD = standard deviation; CI = confidence interval; n = number of events; N = number of participants; OR = odds ratio.

Table 3. Reduction in patients with visual loss according to change in logMAR acuity

Navigate to table in Review

Table 4. Reduction in cerebrospinal fluid pressure

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI) adjusted for centre, baseline value of outcome and baseline papilloedema grade
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N
Wall 2014: Change in CSF pressure (mmH²0) between baseline and 6 months	‐112.3	Not reported	47	‐52.4	Not reported	38	‐59.9 (‐96.4 to ‐23.4)

Table 4. Reduction in cerebrospinal fluid pressure

Navigate to table in Review

Table 5. Resolution of papilloedema or oculomotor disorder or both

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI) adjusted for centre and baseline papilloedema grade
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N
Wall 2014: Change in papilloedema grade between baseline and 6 months, graded by fundus photographs	‐1.31	SE 0.11^a	^a	‐0.61	SE 0.11^a	^a	‐0.70 (‐1.00 to ‐0.40)
Wall 2014: Change in papilloedema grade between baseline and 6 months, clinical grading	‐1.75	SE 0.13^a	^a	‐0.85	SE 0.14^a	^a	‐0.91 (‐1.27 to ‐0.54)
^aIt is unclear how many patients were included in these analyses. Abbreviations: MD = mean difference; SD = standard deviation; SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval; N = number of participants.

Table 5. Resolution of papilloedema or oculomotor disorder or both

Navigate to table in Review

Table 6. Improvement in headache

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI) adjusted for centre, baseline value of outcome and baseline papilloedema grade
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N
Ball 2011: Change in headache score as measured on a 10‐point visual analogue score at 12 months	Not reported	Not reported	21	Not reported	Not reported	20	1.0 (‐1.80 to 3.70)
Wall 2014: Change in HIT‐6 total score between baseline and 6 months	‐9.56	Not reported^a	^a	‐9.11	Not reported^a	^a	‐0.45 (‐3.50 to 2.60)
^aIt is unclear how many patients were included in these analyses. Abbreviations: MD = mean difference; SD = standard deviation; CI = confidence interval; N = number of participants.

Table 6. Improvement in headache

Navigate to table in Review

Table 7. Resolution of headache

Outcome	Acetalomazide		Placebo		OR (95% CI)
	n	N	n	N
Ball 2011: Number of people with headache at 12 months	9	21	13	20	0.42 (0.12 to 1.41)
Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; n = number of events; N = number of participants; OR = odds ratio.

Table 7. Resolution of headache

Navigate to table in Review

Table 8. Remission rate

Outcome	Acetalomazide		Placebo		OR (95% CI)
	n	N	n	N
Ball 2011: Number of people in remission at 12 months	9	21	8	20	1.13 (0.32 to 3.90)
Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; n = number of events; N = number of participants; OR = odds ratio.

Table 8. Remission rate

Navigate to table in Review

Table 9. Side effects

Outcome	Acetalomazide		Placebo		OR (95% CI)
Outcome	n	N	n	N	OR (95% CI)
Elevated ALT	6	69	3	79	1.90 (0.46 to 7.87)
Decreased CO₂	9	69	0	79	19.49 (1.12 to 340.66)
Diarrhea	12	69	3	79	4.11 (1.11 to 15.15)
Dizziness	8	69	3	79	2.60 (0.66 to 10.16)
Dysgeusia	13	69	0	79	29.20 (1.71 to 500.07)
Dyspepsia	7	69	1	79	6.91 (0.83 to 57.49)
Dyspnea	7	69	2	79	3.41 (0.69 to 16.94)
Fatigue	14	69	1	79	15.17 (1.94 to 118.27)
Headache	13	69	11	79	1.10 (0.46 to 2.62)
Nasopharyngitis	5	69	8	79	0.55 (0.17 to 1.75)
Nausea	26	69	10	79	2.99 (1.33 to 6.70)
Paresthesia	41	69	5	79	13.48 (4.96 to 36.64)
Post‐LP syndrome	5	69	6	79	0.75 (0.22 to 2.56)
Rash	7	69	2	79	3.41 (0.69 to 16.94)
Sinusitis	3	69	6	79	0.44 (0.11 to 1.82)
Tinnitus	11	69	3	79	3.72 (1.00 to 13.85)
Vomiting	12	69	3	79	4.11 (1.11 to 15.15)
This data is from one study (Wall 2014). Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; n = number of events; N = number of participants; OR = odds ratio.

Table 9. Side effects

Navigate to table in Review

Table 10. Quality of life

Outcome	Acetalomazide			Placebo			MD (95% CI) adjusted for centre, baseline value of outcome and baseline papilloedema grade
Outcome	Mean	SD	N	Mean	SD	N
Wall 2014: Change in VFQ‐25 total score between baseline and 6 months	8.33	SE 1.47^a	^a	1.98	SE 1.53^a	^a	6.35 (2.22 to 10.47)
Wall 2014: Change in VFQ‐25 10‐item neuro‐ophthalmic supplement between baseline and 6 months	9.82	SE 1.55^a	^a	1.59	SE 1.62^a	^a	8.23 (3.89 to 12.56)
Wall 2014: Change in SF‐36 Physical Component Summary between baseline and 6 months	5.84	SE 1.01^a	^a	2.82	SE 1.03^a	^a	3.02 (0.34 to 5.70)
Wall 2014: Change in SF‐36 Mental Component Summary between baseline and 6 months	5.62	SE 1.16^a	^a	2.17	SE 1.17^a	^a	3.45 (0.35 to 6.55)
^aIt is unclear how many patients were included in these analyses. Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; N = number of participants; SE = standard error; SD = standard deviation.

Table 10. Quality of life

Navigate to table in Review

	Cochrane Review language Select your preferred language for Cochrane Reviews and other content. Sections without translation will be in English.

	Website language Select your preferred language for the Cochrane Library website.

Cochrane Review language

Website language

References

References to studies included in this review

Ball 2011 {published data only}

Wall 2014 {published data only}

References to studies excluded from this review

Abubaker 2011 {published data only}

Aguilar Perez 2013 {published data only}

Ahmed 2011 {published data only}

Ahmed 2014 {published data only}

Albuquerque 2011 {published data only}

Alsuhaibani 2011 {published data only}

Bussière 2010 {published data only}

Bynke 2004 {published data only}

Çelebisoy 2007 {published data only}

Egan 2011 {published data only}

Fonseca 2014 {published data only}

Gates 2013 {published data only}

Halmagyi 2010 {published data only}

Herzau 1998 {published data only}

Heyman 2013 {published data only}

Johnson 1998 {published data only}

Kandasamy 2011 {published data only}

Lin 2012 {published data only}

NCT01407809 {published data only}

NCT02143258 {published data only}

Nemeth 1995 {published data only}

Nithyanandam 2008 {published data only}

Owler 2003 {published data only}

Raoof 2010 {published data only}

Salman 2001 {published data only}

Sesenna 1996 {published data only}

Sinclair 2010 {published data only}

Sinclair 2014 {published data only}

Sugerman 1999 {published data only}

Sugerman 2001 {published data only}

Tacke 2012 {published data only}

Tarnaris 2011 {published data only}

Teleb 2015 {published data only}

Warman 2000 {published data only}

References to ongoing studies

NCT02017444 {published data only}

NCT02124486 {published data only}

Additional references

Corbett 1982

Donahue 2000

Durcan 1988

Friedman 2002

Galgano 2013

Giuseffi 1991

Glanville 2006

GRADEpro 2014 [Computer program]

Higgins 2011

Ireland 1990

Johnston 1974a

Johnston 1974b

Karahalios 1996

Klein 2013

Lipton 1972

Lochhead 2003

Mathew 1996

Maxner 1987

Phillips 2012

Quincke 1896

Radhakrishnan 1993a

Radhakrishnan 1993b

Radhakrishnan 1994

RevMan 2014 [Computer program]

Rowe 1998

Sher 1983

Sugerman 1997

Tabassi 2005

Wall 1991

Warner 2002

Warner 2007

Weisberg 1975

References to other published versions of this review

Lueck 2002

Lueck 2005