Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23944716›Full record

ReviewBrain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland)2014

Convection-enhanced drug delivery to the brain: therapeutic potential and neuropathological considerations.

Neil U Barua, Steven S Gill, Seth Love

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Digital Twin Technology In Radiology.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Fifty years of DIPG: looking at the future with hope.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Neil U BaruaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Neurosciences, School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Frenchay Hospital, Bristol, UK.
Steven S Gill
Seth Love

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Convection-enhanced delivery (CED) describes a direct method of drug delivery to the brain through intraparenchymal microcatheters. By establishing a pressure gradient at the tip of the infusion catheter in order to exploit bulk flow through the interstitial spaces of the brain, CED offers a number of advantages over conventional drug delivery methods-bypass of the blood-brain barrier, targeted distribution through large brain volumes and minimization of systemic side effects. Despite showing early promise, CED is yet to fulfill its potential as a mainstream strategy for the treatment of neurological disease. Substantial research effort has been dedicated to optimize the technology for CED and identify the parameters, which govern successful drug distribution. It seems likely that successful clinical translation of CED will depend on suitable catheter technology being used in combination with drugs with optimal physicochemical characteristics, and on neuropathological analysis in appropriate preclinical models. In this review, we consider the factors most likely to influence the success or failure of CED, and review its application to the treatment of high-grade glioma, Parkinson's disease (PD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseBrain DiseasesBrain NeoplasmsCathetersConvectionDrug Delivery SystemsGliomaHumansParkinson DiseaseAlzheimer's diseaseblood-brain barrierconvection-enhanced deliverydrug deliverygliomaParkinson's diseaseperivascular spaces

Identifiers

PMID23944716
PMCPMC8028869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.