Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Analytical Methods in Chemistry
Volume 2019, Article ID 5872347, 7 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5872347
Review Article

Hydrocephaly Analysis Supported by Computerized Tomography and Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

1Department of Radiology, Jinan Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, No. 105, Jiefang Road, Lixia District, Jinan, Shandong Province 250013, China
2Department of Hematology, Jinan Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province 250013, China
3Equipment Management Office, Jinan Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province 250013, China
4Department of Internal Medicine, Jinan Central Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province 250013, China
5School of Bioprocess Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 02600 Arau, Perlis, Malaysia
6Institute of Nano Electronic Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, 01000 Kangar, Perlis, Malaysia

Correspondence should be addressed to Shujing Li; moc.anis@njgnijuhsil

Received 24 June 2019; Accepted 9 September 2019; Published 30 September 2019

Academic Editor: Antony C. Calokerinos

Copyright © 2019 Tong Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Hydrocephalus is widely known as “hydrocephaly” or “water in the brain,” a building up of abnormal cerebrospinal fluid in the brain ventricles. Due to this abnormality, the size of the head becomes larger and increases the pressure in the skull. This pressure compresses the brain and causes damage to the brain. Identification by imaging techniques on the hydrocephalus is mandatory to treat the disease. Various methods and equipment have been used to image the hydrocephalus. Among them, computerized tomography (CT) scan and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) are the most considered methods and gives accurate result of imaging. Apart from imaging, cerebrospinal fluid-based biomarkers are also used to identify the condition of hydrocephalus. This review is discussed on “hydrocephalus” and its imaging captured by CT scan and NMR to support the biomarker analysis.

1. Introduction

Hydrocephalus is the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) accumulation in the cavities or ventricles of the brain. It causes the enlargement of the skull, which leads to the increment of pressure in the intracranial, and it can be the fatal. In most cases, hydrocephalus is congenital and present during the birth. It also generally happened with children and adult over 60 years; however, some cases with young adults were reported [1, 2]. The comparison of the normal brain (Figure 1(a)) and hydrocephalus brain (Figure 1(b)) shows the obvious differences. Usually under normal condition, CSF flows through the spinal cord and brain, but cases reported with a blockage prevent the normal flow of CSF and decrease the ability of blood vessel to absorb CSF, and in other cases, the excess CSF has been produced by the brain. The above physiological abnormalities cause the increment of CSF, yield pressure to the brain, and damage the brain tissue. Figure 2 explains the pathogenesis of hydrocephalus that has been shown in the past. With hydrocephalus, “hydrophilic” children face mental and physical disabilities which are the challenges. They have the problems of gait instability, subtle memory, hand and arm dysfunction, and cognitive defeats. Treatment of hydrocephalus at the earlier stages reduce the above disabilities [3]. Before the apparent swelling appearance is being found, hydrocephalus should be diagnosed at very early suspected stage. In general, hydrocephalus is classified into two types, namely, communicating and noncommunicating. The example of communicating is posthaemorrhagic, and aqueductal stenosis is for noncommunicating (Figure 3).

Figure 1: Comparison of normal brain and hydrocephalus brain: (a) normal brain; (b) hydrocephalus brain.
Figure 2: Pathogenesis of hydrocephalus. The ways of formation and details are explained.
Figure 3: Classification of hydrocephalus. Examples of two types, communicating and noncommunicating, are shown.

Different approaches have been used to diagnose the hydrocephalus, which include physical, neurological, and imaging tests. In particular, imaging studies show a great accuracy on hydrocephalus. Imaging reflects the enlarged size of the ventricles, caused by CSF. Three main types of imaging tests were popularized to identify the hydrocephalus, which includes ultrasound, CT (computerized tomography or computerized axial tomography), and NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Among the above three methods, MRI shows the detailed image of hydrocephalus under the magnetic field, whereas CT exposes some amount of radiation [4, 5].

2. Congenital Hydrocephalus

Various reasons have been identified for the cause of hydrocephalus such as tuberculosis, meningitis, congenital, and neoplasm (Figure 4). Among them, the following are considered as the primary reasons for hydrocephalus.

Figure 4: Causes of hydrocephalus. Examples of hydrocephalus caused in extraventricular and intraventricular are shown..
2.1. Neural Tube Defects

Neural tube closure (neural tube defeat (NTD)) is a common birth disorder in newborn and the fetus, affecting one in every 1000 births worldwide [6]. NTD is an opening in the brain or spinal cord, which occurs at the earlier stages of human physiological development. The embryo stage of the spinal cord starts as a region of flat and then rolls into a tube after 28 days of pregnancy, called neural tube [7]. NTD develops when the neural tube is not closed completely. Disturbance in the sequential events of embryonic neurulation cause the detects (anencephaly and spins Bifida). There are two types of NTDs such as open and close ones. The common type of NTD is an open type, which occurs when the spinal cord or brain are exposed during the birth through a defect in the skull or vertebrae. Spina bifida, encephalocele, and anencephaly are the examples for open NTDs. Only rare cases are found to have closed NTD, which happens when the skin covers the spinal defeat. The lipomyelomeningocele, tethered cord, and lipomenigocele are the examples for the closed NTDs. Since NTDs are directly linked to the neural plate abnormal closure, it leads to the hydrocephalus [8].

2.2. Aqueductal Stenosis

Aqueductal stenosis is one of the major causes of hydrocephalus, particularly congenital hydrocephalus. It is the blockage on the passage of aqueduct of Sylvius, which is the narrow channel (approximately 15 mm) connecting the third ventricle to the fourth ventricle in the dorsal midbrain [9, 10]. This causes the narrowing of aqueduct of sylvius, making CSF fluid not being able to circulate [11, 12]. The aqueductal stenosis is divided into four types, which are stenosis, forking, septum formation, and gliosis. The best diagnosis method of aqueductal is made by MRI [13].

2.3. Dandy–Walker Syndrome

Dandy–walker syndrome is a congenital brain malformation involving the fluid-fill around and inside the cerebellum (Figure 1(a); back area in the brain is needed for coordinating the movement) [14, 15]. An enlargement of the small channel called the fourth ventricle causes the Dandy–Walker syndrome. Since this ventricle allows the fluid between the lower and upper parts of the spinal cord and brain and due to the enlargement, there is an absolute lack of area between two cerebellar hemispheres. The formation of cyst occurs near the lower skull, and this size increment leads to hydrocephalus.

2.4. Chiari Malformation

Chiari malformation is a structural defect in the base of the cerebellum and the skull [16, 17]. It occurs when the part of the skull is abnormally small or misshapens, pressing the brain and cerebellum ultimately forcing it down into the spinal canal and the foramen magnum. It blocks or controls the flow of CSF (cerebrospinal fluid), which circulates nutrients and filters the chemicals from the blood. Chiari malformations are classified into four types, namely, type I, type II, type III, and type IV. Type I forms when the cerebellar tonsils (lower part of the cerebellum) extend into the foramen magnum (opening at the base of the skull). Type II appears usually in the childhood stage. In this case, both the brain tissue and the cerebellum protrude into the foramen magnum. And, also the nerve tissue, which connects two halves of the cerebellum, is found to be missed or only formed partially. Types III and IV occur rarely. In case of type III, there is an involvement of the protrusion herniation with the cerebellum and brain stem via the foramen magnum and also in the spinal cord. Type IV involves the undeveloped or an incomplete cerebellum. It has been found that most of the children born with type II Chiari malformation exhibit hydrocephaly. CT-scan and MRI have been commonly used to diagnose Chiari malformation. These are routinely followed in the diagnosis and follow ups to elucidate the progression of hydrocephalus in patients [18]. To elucidate this, the typical section of the brain (Figure 5(a)) and spinal cord is displayed (Figure 5(b)).

Figure 5: Typical cross sections. (a) Brain; (b) spinal cord.

3. CT-Scan for Hydrocephaly

Computerized tomography scan (CT or CAT scan) is a diagnostic tool that helps to observe the images of the scanned area by combining the computer technology and a series of X-ray images [19]. CAT scan helps to differentiate the abnormal and normal structures of the organs; the differentiated profiles are used to identify the abnormalities of the infected organs, so that it is considered as an important technique in the field of medical imaging. Since CT scans give more detailed information than X-ray, it has been widely used to diagnose the hydrocephalus. The imaging for the dilation of the lateral ventricle with hydrocephalus is shown in Figures 6(a) and 6(b) [21].

Figure 6: (a) Hydrocephaly image by CT scan (the image is obtained from Fitz and Harwood-Nash (1978)). (b) MRI obtained by steady-state technique (the image is obtained from Ringstad et al. [20]).

In the CT scan, the prominent temporal horns are the primary indicators among other observations. Usually, with the transverse direction, the third ventricle in diameter of >5 mm has been notified as the abnormality [22]. Balloon appearance with the frontal horn of periventricular hypodensity can be found in obstructive hydrocephalus. Additionally, the ventricular SRC index has also been utilized. The Ventricular SRC Index is estimated by the distance between the anterior tips of frontal horn/bifrontal diameter at the same level (it is from the inner table of the skull). The normal measurement is considered to be thirty percent. Usually, the active hydrocephalus has been marked by the increment in the volume of ventricular. The activity is monitored by the symptoms of the pronounced clinical observation and by the progression follow-up in the CT analysis. The usage of CT scans is prevalent among the hydrocephalus community owing to the utilization of multiple CT scans. Considering the dose exposure of radiation, it has been utilized with a CT scan as 100 to 500 folds more than the routine traditional radiography [23]. This is relatively higher exposure of radiation, whereas MRIs can be preferred in order to eliminate the radiation exposure. However, several patients have no option between MRI and CT scans. It is due to the reason the unavailability of an MRI facility in all the hospitals and in addition to various other medical reasons, the patient does not have an option with MRI. However, the reports have indicated that the utilization of CT scans was enhanced during the last 2 decades and more common with paediatrics. On the other hand, hydrocephalus with children is increasing and considered to be the population that is getting susceptible due to the higher frequency of imaging [24].

4. Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Hydrocephalus

As stated above, CT scan uses the X-ray, which has been noticed to cause the side effect due to the exposure to several rounds of scanning [25]. The alternate obvious option is MRI, which uses the powerful magnetic field and pulses of radio frequency for the efficient scanning. The methods of in vivo MRI and spectroscopy were well-set for the past 2 decades. Recent potentials of these methods to analyse the function of the human brain become a fast-growing field of study. NMR commonly shows several lesions and higher participation than CT. The visibility and regions of lesions recognized by NMR are same as those of autopsy obser[[parms resize(1), pos(50, 50), size(200, 200), bgcol(156)]]ed by CT may disappear with repeated examinations, but lesions recognized by MRI will not resolve with the repeated analysis. Different approaches or methods have been developed for the MRI. Figure 6(b) shows the hydrocephaly image taken by the MRI [20].

MRI works mainly with the hydrogen nucleus, proton in the water, and fat in the tissue [26, 27]. Protons are aligned under a magnetic field; and the radio frequency causes the hydrogen nuclei to resonate. MRI usually scans with 0.5- and 1.5-tesla field strength [25]. MRI observations show convincing results of the morphological appearance and pathological, analytical details of the brain. It helps to distinguish between the normal and pathological brain tissues. In addition, it reveals the dynamics of different neuromuscular diseases. It has been widely agreed that MRI with hydrocephalus is a concrete approach for the analysis of the pathophysiology and pathogenesis, particularly with the periventricular tissue.

5. Computerized Tomography versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging

As stated above, the basic difference between CT-scan and MRI is that X-ray has been used in the former case, whereas magnetic field and radio frequency are used in the latter case. Even though different advantages were proposed for both CT and MRI, there is a clear-cut difference between these two in terms of potential merits. Clear images of tissue or bone and infrastructures of an internal organ can be obtained by MRI and considered to be better than CT-scanned images. Contrast dye can be incorporated into the MRI specimen, making a clear distinction for the cancer tissue [27]. However, the analysis with MRI is noisy and consumes a longer time.

6. Other Imaging Systems for Hydrocephaly

Apart from CT and NRI, other imaging systems are taken into the consideration for imaging hydrocephaly. 3D ultrasound was used to detect the X-linked hydrocephaly [28]. Not only that, the cytomegalovirus infected pregnant women were affected by fetal hydrocephaly and hydrocephalus syndrome, which were effectively imaged by the ultrasound [29]. Transvaginal sonographic detection was utilized to identify hydrocephaly during the postmenstrual weeks of 15 and 20; this helps to diagnose hydrocephaly before the gestational age [30]. Moreover, machine learning methods were used to detect hydrocephaly efficiently, and hydrocephalus was disproportionately identified by the automated classification model [31].

7. Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers and Detection of Hydrocephalus

Apart from CT and NMR, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are also effectively used to diagnose hydrocephalus. Moreover, identification of these biomarkers gives additional support along with CT and NMR. Cerebrospinal fluid is a regulated fluid with molecular diversities on the local neuro-pathophysiological and neurophysiological processes. Therefore, biomarkers from CSF are highly relevant to different neurological related diseases, which include amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, and hydrocephaly [3234]. The elevated CSF protein was found in the aqueductal obstruction hydrocephaly. Increasing level of CSF protein causes the increment in the CSF-parenchymal oncotic/osmatic gradient; ultimately, the volume of CSF increases, contributing to the hydrocephaly. In particular proteins, APP (amyloid precursor protein), L1CAM (L1neural cell adhesion molecule), and NCAM-1 (neural cell adhesion molecule) were found as the efficient candidates for CSF biomarkers. In addition, it has been found that the level of aminoterminal propeptide and TGF-β1 is highly related with the congenital hydrocephalus. In other cases, GEAP protein (glial fibrillary acidic protein), vimentin, MBP (myelin basic protein), and CNPase are playing a potential role in developing hydrocephaly.

Identifying these biomarkers using a biosensor gives supporting information for hydrocephaly diagnosis with CT and MRI. Various sensing methods and probes have been used to identify these biomarkers from the CSF. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), surface plasmon resonance, waveguide mode sensor, and electrochemical sensor are the predominant sensors to quantify the level of CSF protein (Figure 7(a)). In general, antibody, DNA, RNA, and aptamers were used as the probe to identify and quantify the level of CSF proteins (Figure 7(b)). The level of β-amyloid peptide (Aβ) protein from CSF was quantified by surface-enhanced RAMAN spectroscopy [35]. In addition, hydrogel-based biosensor was used to identify the level of CSF amyloid-beta oligomers [36]. The interdigitated electrode sensor was used to identify the CSF protein amyloid-β [37]. These types of biosensors with imaging techniques (CT and NMR) give confidence on identification of hydrocephaly and help to treat the people at earlier stages for further medication.

Figure 7: Hydrocephaly detection using CSF fluid biomarkers and identification by a biosensor. (a) Biomarker identification by a different type of biosensor; (b) CSF biomarker detection by different probes such as DNA, antibody, and aptamer.

8. Conclusion

In the current overview, the basics of hydrocephaly and its analysis by imaging techniques such as computerized tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance are discussed. Both computerized tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance are widely accepted methods and currently in use, owing to their advantages over ultrasound methods. The major advantage of these methods compared to the ultrasound is the ability to penetrate the bone specimen, which cannot be possible by the ultrasound. Between computerized tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance, the latter one is able to differentiate between benign and malignant tissues and the apparent results can be attained. Further, it has been suggested widely that stroke can be recognized by diffused nuclear magnetic resonance as it carries more advantages.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

All authors contributed to the preparation of the manuscript, were involved in discussion, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the Servier Medical Art (http://servier.com/Powerpoint-image-bank). The authors would like to acknowledge the following publisher and authors for reproducing the images: AANS publisher (for reproducing Figure 4 from Ringstad et al., J. Neurosurg 124: 1850–1857, 2016) and Page press (for reproducing Figure 1 from Garber and Penar, Clinics and Practice 2: e22, 2012).

References

  1. D. P. Cavalcanti and M. A. Salomão, “Incidence of congenital hydrocephalus and the role of the prenatal diagnosis,” Jornal de Pediatria, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 135–140, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  2. S. L. Kinsman, “Congenital hydrocephalus,” in Neurobiology of Disease, Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  3. M. R. Del Bigio, C. R. Crook, and R. Buist, “Magnetic resonance imaging and behavioral analysis of immature rats with Kaolin-induced hydrocephalus: pre- and postshunting observations,” Experimental Neurology, vol. 148, no. 1, pp. 256–264, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. R. P. Guillerman, “Infant craniospinal ultrasonography: beyond hemorrhage and hydrocephalus,” Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 71–85, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. M. Noya, J. Castillo, A. Castro, D. Dapena, M. Lema, and A. Ansede, “Computerized cerebral tomography in tuberous sclerosis. Study of 3 patients,” Medicina Clinica, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 150–153, 1981. View at Google Scholar
  6. L. E. Mitchell, “Epidemiology of neural tube defects,” American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C: Seminars in Medical Genetics, vol. 135C, no. 1, pp. 88–94, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. M. C. Trinidad and M. Wick, “Neural Tube Defects. Practice Bulletin No. 187. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecoloists,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 130, no. 6, pp. e279–e290, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. C. Pyrgaki and L. Niswander, “Neural-tube defects,” in Neural Circuit Development and Function in the Heathy and Diseased Brain, Academic Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  9. G. Cinalli, P. Spennato, A. Nastro et al., “Hydrocephalus in aqueductal stenosis,” Child’s Nervous System, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 1621–1642, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. G. Vijayalakshmi, E. Elavarasu, and M. D. Venkatesan, “Aqueductal stenosis and hydrocephalus,” Indian Journal of Practical Pediatrics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 300–302, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  11. A. Rossi, “Aqueductal stenosis,” in Brain Imaging with MRI and CT: An Image Pattern Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  12. D. Paulson, S. W. Hwang, W. E. Whitehead, D. J. Curry, T. G. Luerssen, and A. Jea, “Aqueductal developmental venous anomaly as an unusual cause of congenital hydrocephalus: a case report and review of the literature,” Journal of Medical Case Reports, vol. 6, no. 1, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. W. Atlas, A. S. Mark, and E. K. Fram, “Aqueductal stenosis: evaluation with gradient-echo rapid MR imaging,” Radiology, vol. 169, no. 2, pp. 449–453, 1988. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. P. Tobías-González, M. Gil Mira, J. Valero de Bernabé, and I. Zapardiel, “Differential diagnosis of Dandy-Walker syndrome different presentations,” Ginecología y Obstetricia de México, vol. 80, no. 8, pp. 534–539, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  15. V. Figueroa-Ángel, I. Reyes-Moreno, R. García-López, C. Rodríguez-Aceves, and I. Martínez-Muñiz, “Síndrome de Dandy-Walker,” Archivos de Neurociencias, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 92–98, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  16. F. S. Erol, N. Ucler, and H. Yakar, “The association of Chiari type III malformation and Klippel-Feil syndrome with mirror movement: a case report,” Turkish Neurosurgery, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 655–658, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. N. E. Krupina, “Chiari malformation type I and syringomyelia,” Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova, vol. 103, no. 7, pp. 4–9, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  18. A. Kanavaki, B. Jenny, and S. Hanquinet, “Chiari I malformation associated with premature unilateral closure of the posterior intraoccipital synchondrosis in a preterm infant,” Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 658–660, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. Haghighi, M. H. Baghery, F. Rashidi, Z. Khairandish, and M. Sayadi, “Abnormal findings in brain CT scans among children,” Journal of Comprehensive Pediatrics, vol. 5, no. 2, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. G. Ringstad, K. E. Emblem, and P. K. Eide, “Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging reveals net retrograde aqueductal flow in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 124, no. 6, pp. 1850–1857, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. C. R. Fitz and D. C. Harwood-Nash, “Computed tomography in hydrocephalus,” Journal of Computed Tomography, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 91–108, 1978. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. E. M. Chatzidakis, G. Barlas, N. Condilis et al., “Brain CT scan indexes in the normal pressure hydrocephalus: predictive value in the outcome of patients and correlation to the clinical symptoms,” Annali Italiani Di Chirurgia, vol. 79, no. 5, pp. 353–362, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  23. K. Jończyk-Potoczna, M. Frankiewicz, M. Warzywoda, K. Strzyzewski, and B. Pawlak, “Low-dose protocol for head CT in evaluation of hydrocephalus in children,” Polish Journal of Radiology, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 7–11, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  24. L.-W. Gao, A. X. Jiao, X. R. Wu et al., “Clinical characteristics of disseminated cryptococcosis in previously healthy children in China,” BMC Infectious Diseases, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 359, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. Berger, “Magnetic resonance imaging,” BMJ, vol. 324, no. 7328, p. 35, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. W. G. Bradley, “Magnetic resonance imaging of normal pressure hydrocephalus,” Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 120–128, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. V. V. Maller and R. I. Gray, “Noncommunicating Hydrocephalus,” Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 109–119, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. E. Corral, A. Barrios, M. Isnard et al., “Prenatal three-dimensional ultrasound detection of adducted thumbs in X-linked hydrocephaly: two case reports with molecular genetic studies,” Case Reports in Obstetetrics and Gynecologt, vol. 2015, Article ID 561713, 4 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  29. S. M. Gakhramanova, “Importance of ultrasound scan for detection of prenatal hydrocephalus syndrome, fetal hydrocephaly and placentitis in cytomegalovirus pregnancy,” World Applied Science Journal, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1421–1424, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  30. I. E. Timor-Tritsch, A. Monteagudo, N. Haratz-Rubinstein, and R. U. Levine, “Transvaginal sonographic detection of adducted thumbs, hydrocephalus, and agenesis of the corpus callosum at 22 postmenstrual weeks: the masa spectrum or L1 spectrum: a case report and review of the literature,” Prenatal Diagnosis, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 543–548, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  31. N. B. Gunter, C. G. Schwarz, J. Graff-Radford et al., “Automated detection of imaging features of disproportionately enlarged subarachnoid space hydrocephalus using machine learning methods,” NeuroImage: Clinical, vol. 21, p. 101605, 2019. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. D. D. Limbrick, L. Castaneyra-Ruiz, R. H. Han, D. Berger, J. P. McAllister, and D. M. Morales, “Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers of pediatric hydrocephalus,” Pediatric Neurosurgery, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 426–435, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. Y. Zhou, H. Dong, L. Liu, and M. Xu, “Simple colorimetric detection of amyloidβ-peptide (1-40) based on aggregation of gold nanoparticles in the presence of copper ions,” Small, vol. 11, no. 18, pp. 2144–2149, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. Y. Zhou, L. Liu, Y. Hao, and M. Xu, “Detection of aβ monomers and oligomers: early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease,” Chemistry-An Asian Journal, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 805–817, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. I.-H. Chou, M. Benford, H. T. Beier et al., “Nanofluidic biosensing for β-amyloid detection using surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy,” Nano Letters, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1729–1735, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. L. Sun, Y. Zhong, J. Gui, X. Wang, X. Zhuang, and J. Weng, “A hydrogel biosensor for high selective and sensitive detection of amyloid-beta oligomers,” International Journal of Nanomedicine, vol. 13, pp. 843–856, 2018. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. Y. K. Yoo, J. Kim, G. Kim et al., “A highly sensitive plasma-based amyloid-β detection system through medium-changing and noise cancellation system for early diagnosis of the Alzheimer’s disease,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 8882, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus