Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a syndrome caused by raised intracranial CSF pressure (ICP) without an underlying mass lesion, hydrocephalus, or cerebral edema. Patients typically present with intractable headaches (90%), papilledema (89%), visual changes (62%), and pulsatile tinnitus (48%). In North American women, it has a prevalence of 15–19/100,000. If left untreated, it can result in blindness. Since first described by Walter Dandy in 1937, who believed it was related to increased blood or CSF production, the etiology has been and remains controversial. Traditional treatments include medication (acetazolamide), weight loss, CSF diversion surgery, and optic nerve fenestration. There is up to a 45% recurrence rate with medical therapy and significant complication rates with surgery.
With the advent of modern CT and MR imaging, it has been shown that 30–93% of these patients have either unilateral or bilateral transverse sinus (TS) stenosis. It is still unknown whether this is the cause or consequence of raised ICP. Our interest in the topic was stimulated by the initial report of Higgins et al1 that IIH symptoms could be relieved by balloon angioplasty and stenting of the TS stenosis. In our series of 10 patients who had failed medical therapy, unilateral TS stenting resulted in dramatic clinical improvement in all patients. This was one of the largest case series at the time, and led to more interest in the topic. Subsequent case series2,3 showed similar findings, and included mathematical models postulating pathophysiologic mechanisms for the sinus stenosis and clinical responses to stenting.2 A recent review of the literature,3 including 143 patients, has shown a technical success rate of 99% and a complication rate of 6%. Mean follow-up of 22 months has shown improvement in headaches in 88% of patients, resolution of papilledema in 97%, of visual changes in 87%, and of tinnitus in 93% of patients.
TS stenting is now an accepted treatment option for IIH in patients who fail medical management. It is seen as an effective and less invasive alternative to CSF diversion surgery. Although one randomized controlled