ArticleCroatian medical journal2016
The effects of lumboperitoneal and ventriculoperitoneal shunts on the cranial and spinal cerebrospinal fluid volume in a patient with idiopathic intracranial hypertension.
Article in Croatian medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Body position influence on cerebrospinal fluid volume redistribution inside the cranial and spinal CSF compartments.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Chronic CSF leak from lumbar-peritoneal shunt tract: A case report.Surgical neurology international · 2022Article
- Cerebrospinal fluid micro-volume changes inside the spinal space affect intracranial pressure in different body positions of animals and phantom.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lumboperitoneal (LP) and ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunts are a frequent treatment modality for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). Although these shunts have been used for a long time, it is still not clear how they change the total craniospinal CSF volume and what portions of cranial and spinal CSF are affected. This report for the first time presents the results of a volumetric analysis of the total cranial and spinal CSF space in a patient with IIH. We performed an automated segmentation of the cranial and a manual segmentation of the spinal CSF space first with an LP shunt installed and again after the LP shunt was replaced by a VP shunt. When the LP shunt was in place, the total CSF volume was smaller than when the VP shunt was in place (222.4 cm(3) vs 279.2 cm(3)). The difference was almost completely the result of the spinal CSF volume reduction (49.3 cm(3) and 104.9 cm(3) for LP and VP, respectively), while the cranial CSF volume was not considerably altered (173.2 cm(3) and 174.2 cm(3) for LP and VP, respectively). This report indicates that LP and VP shunts in IIH do not considerably change the cranial CSF volume, while the reduction of CSF volume after LP shunt placement affects almost exclusively the spinal part of the CSF system. Our results suggest that an analysis of both the cranial and the spinal part of the CSF space is necessary for therapeutic procedures planning and for an early recognition of numerous side effects that often arise after shunts placement in IIH patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.