SynthesisInternational forum of allergy & rhinology2017
Outcomes of endoscopic optic nerve decompression in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension.
Synthesis in International forum of allergy & rhinology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic Bilateral Optic Nerve Decompression for Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Nursing Research of Optic Canal Decompression Operation under Nasal Endoscopic Medical Treatment Based on Intelligent Internet of Things for Traumatic Vision Disorders.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Perspectives on diagnosis and management of adult idiopathic intracranial hypertension.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2018Review
- Cranial morcellation decompression for refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension in children.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe conventional treatment for idiopathic intracranial hypertension involves weight loss, steroids, diuretics, and/or serial lumbar punctures; however, if the symptoms persist or worsen, surgical intervention is recommended. Surgical options include cerebrospinal fluid diversion procedures, such as ventriculoperitoneal and lumboperitoneal shunts, and optic nerve decompression with nerve sheath fenestration. The latter can be carried out using an endoscopic approach, but the outcomes of this technique have not been firmly established.
methodsThis systematic review examined the outcomes of performing endoscopic optic nerve decompression (EOND) in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). Six studies were included for a total of 34 patients.
resultsThe patients presented with visual field disturbances (32 of 32 [100%]), visual acuity disruptions (33 of 34 [97.1%]), papilledema (26 of 34 [76.5%]), and persistent headache (30 of 33 [90.1%]). The mean duration of symptoms ranged from 7 to 32 months. Overall, the patients showed post-EOND improvement in signs and symptoms associated with IIH, specifically visual field deficits (93.8%), visual acuity (85.3%), papilledema (81.4%), and headaches (81.8%). Interestingly, 11 cases showed postoperative improvement in their symptoms with bony decompression of the optic canal alone, without nerve sheath fenestration. There were no major adverse events or complications reported with this approach.
conclusionEOND appears to be a promising and safe surgical alternative for patients with IIH who fail to respond to medical treatment. Further studies are needed before we can attest to the clinical validity of this procedure.
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.