Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T14:06:28.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neuropsychological Profiles of Children with Aqueductal Stenosis and Spina Bifida Myelomeningocele

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2012

Lyla E. Hampton ,
Jack M. Fletcher ,
Paul Cirino ,
Susan Blaser ,
Larry A. Kramer  and
Maureen Dennis
Lyla E. Hampton*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
Jack M. Fletcher
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
Paul Cirino
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, Texas
Susan Blaser
Affiliation:
Department of Diagnostic Imaging, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada
Larry A. Kramer
Affiliation:
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas
Maureen Dennis
Affiliation:
Program in Neuroscience and Mental Health, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Canada
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to: Lyla Hampton, Department of Psychology, University of Houston Texas Medical Center Annex, 2151 W. Holcombe Blvd., Suite 222, Houston TX 77204-5053. E-mail: [email protected](email)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We compared neuropsychological profiles in children with shunted hydrocephalus secondary to aqueductal stenosis (AS), a rare form of congenital hydrocephalus, and spina bifida myelomeningocele (SBM), a common form of congenital hydrocephalus. Participants were 180 children with shunted hydrocephalus grouped according to etiology: SBM (n = 151), AS (n = 29), and typically developing (TD; n = 60) individuals. The group with AS performed below the TD group on all tasks except for reading, and their overall performance was higher than the group with SBM, who had the lowest performance in the sample. Both clinical groups significantly differed from the TD group on tasks of spatial function, concept formation, motor function, and memory. Performance of the subgroup of AS children with normal cerebellum status approximated that of the TD group, while those with cerebellar anomalies performed lower than others with AS. Cerebellar abnormalities (present in the whole SBM group and in a subset of the AD group) are associated with more compromise of cognitive as well as motor function. (JINS, 2012, 18, 1–10)

Keywords

HydrocephalusSpina bifidaMyelomeningoceleNeuropsychologyIntelligenceMagnetic resonance imaging
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , February 2013 , pp. 127 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barkovich, A.J. (2005). Congenital anomalies of the spine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Barnes, M., Dennis, M. (1998). Discourse after early-onset hydrocephalus: Core deficits in children of average intelligence. Brain and Language, 61, 309–334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boulet, S., Gambrell, D., Shin, M., Mathews, T., Honein, M. (2009). Racial/Ethnic Differences in the Birth Prevalence of Spina Bifida-United States, 1995–2005. Morbidity and Mortality and Weekly Report (MMWR), 57, 1409–1413.Google Scholar
Brewer, V., Fletcher, J., Hiscock, M., Davidson, K. (2001). Attention processes in children with shunted hydrocephalus versus attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychology, 15, 185–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brookshire, B., Fletcher, J., Bohan, T., Landry, S., Davidson, K., Francis, D. (1995). Specific language deficiencies in children with early onset hydrocephalus. Child Neuropsychology, 1, 106–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burmeister, R., Hannay, H.J., Copeland, K., Fletcher, J.M., Boudousquie, A., Dennis, M. (2005). Attention problems and executive functions in children with spina bifida and hydrocephalus. Child Neuropsychology, 113, 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charney, E. (1992). Neural tube defects: Spina bifida and myelomeningocele. In M. L. Batshaw & Y. M. Perret (Eds.), Children with disabilities: A medical primer. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Del Bigio, M.R. (2010). Neuropathology and structural changes in hydrocephalus. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 16, 16–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Del Bigio, M.R., Wilson, M.J., Enno, T. (2003). Chronic hydrocephalus in rats and humans: White matter loss and behavior changes. Annals of Neurology, 53, 337–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delis, D., Kramer, J.H., Kaplan, E., Ober, B. (1994). California Verbal Learning Test – Children's version. San Antonio, TX: San Antonio Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Dennis, M., Barnes, M. (2010). The cognitive phenotype of spina bifida meningomyelocele. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 16, 31–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennis, M., Fitz, C.R., Netley, C.T., Sugar, J., Harwood-Nash, D.C., Hendrick, E.B., Humphreys, R.P. (1981). The intelligence of hydrocephalic children. Archives of Neurology, 38(10), 607–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennis, M., Landry, S.H., Barnes, M., Fletcher, J.M. (2006). A model of neurocognitive function in spina bifida over the life span. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12, 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, A. (2000). Close interrelation of motor development and cognitive development and of the cerebellum and prefrontal cortex. Child Development, 71, 44–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J., Dennis, M. (2010). Spina bifida and hydrocephalus. In K. O. Yeates, D. M. Ris, H. G. Taylor, & B. F. Pennington (Eds.), Pediatric Neuropsychology: Research, Theory and Practice. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J.M., Brookshire, B.L., Bohan, T.P., Brandt, M.E., Davidson, K.C. (1995). Early Hydrocephalus. In B. P. Rourke (Ed.), Syndrome of nonverbal learning disabilities: Neurodevelopmental manifestations. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J.M., Copeland, K., Frederick, J.A., Blaser, S.E., Kramer, L.A., Northrup, H., Dennis, M. (2005). Spinal lesion level in spina bifida: A source of neural and cognitive heterogeneity. Journal of Neurosurgery, 102, 268–279.Google ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J.M., Francis, D., Thompson, N., Brookshire, B., Bohan, T., Landry, S., et al (1992). Verbal and nonverbal skill discrepancies in hydrocephalic children. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 14, 593–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, J.M., Shaywitz, S.E., Shankweiler, D.P., Katz, L., Liberman, I.Y., Stuebing, K.K., et al (1994). Cognitive profiles of reading disability: Comparisons of discrepancy and low achievement definitions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, L.E., Fletcher, J.M., Cirino, P.T., Blaser, S., Kramer, L.A., Drake, J., Dennis, M. (2011). Hydrocephalus status in spina bifida: An evaluation of variations in neuropsychological outcomes. Journal of Neurosurgery. Pediatrics, 8, 289–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hannay, H.J., Walker, A., Dennis, M., Kramer, L., Blaser, S., Fletcher, J. (2008). Auditory interhemispheric transfer in relation to patterns of partial agenesis and hypoplasia of the corpus callosum in spina bifida myelomeningocele. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 14, 771–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingshead, A.B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University.Google Scholar
Hommet, C., Billard, C., Gillet, P., Barthez, M., Lourmiere, J.M., Santini, J.J., Autret, A. (1999). Neuropsychological and adaptive functioning in adolescents and young adults shunted for congenital hydrocephalus. Journal of Child Neurology, 14, 144–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juranek, J., Salman, M.S. (2010). Anomalous development of brain structure and function in spina bifida myelomeningocele. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 16, 23–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limperopoulos, C., du Plessis, A.J. (2006). Disorders of cerebellar growth and development. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 18, 621–627.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lindgren, S.D., Benton, A.L. (1980). Developmental patterns of visuospatial judgment. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 5, 217–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matson, M.A., Mahone, E.M., Zabel, T.A. (2005). Serial neuropsychological assessment and evidence of shunt malfunction in spina bifida: A longitudinal case study. Child Neuropsychology, 11, 315–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMillan, J.J., Williams, B. (1977). Aqueduct stenosis. Case review and discussion. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 40, 521–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moffitt, K.B., Abiri, O.O., Scheuerle, A.E., Langlois, P.H. (2011). Descriptive epidemiology of selected heritable birth defects in Texas. Birth Defects Research, 91, 990–994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raimondi, A.J. (1994). A unifying theory for the definition and classification of hydrocephalus. Child's Nervous System, 10, 2–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmahmann, J.D. (2004). Disorders of the cerebellum: Ataxia, dysmetria of thoughts, and the cerebellar cognitive affective syndrome. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 16, 367–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, M.A., Fletcher, J.M., Brookshire, B.L., Davidson, K.C., Landry, S.H., Bohan, T.C., Francis, D.J. (1998). Memory functions in children with early hydrocephalus. Neuropsychology, 12, 578–589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swartwout, M.D., Garnaat, S.L., Myszka, K.A., Fletcher, J.M., Dennis, M. (2010). Associations of ethnicity and SES with IQ and achievement in spina bifida meningomyelocele. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35, 927–936.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tew, B., Laurence, K. (1975). The effects of hydrocephalus on intelligence, visual perception, and school attainment. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 16, 186–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, R.L., Hagen, E.P., Sattler, J.M. (1986). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Technical manual (4th ed.). Chicago: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
Tiffin, J. (1968). The Purdue Pegboard. Chicago, IL: Research Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R.W., Johnson, M.B. (1989, 1990). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery-Revised. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar
Woodcock, R.W., Mather, N. (1989, 1990). WJ-R tests of cognitive ability – standard and supplemental batteries: examiners manual. In R. W. Woodcock & M. B. Johnson (Eds.), Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery-revised. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.Google Scholar