ReviewMovement disorders clinical practice
A Review of Clinical Outcomes for Gait and Other Variables in the Surgical Treatment of Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus.
Review in Movement disorders clinical practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital Cognitive Phenotyping for Differential Diagnosis and Monitoring in Neurological Conditions.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Differentiation of normal pressure hydrocephalus from alzheimer's and Parkinson's Diseases using the splenial angle measured on brain CT: diagnostic performance and reliability study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Dynamic compliance of the CSF system in iNPH (Part I) - in vitro investigation of the impact of spinal canal stenoses.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2026Article
- Splenial angle on axial T1 and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery MRI images and idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.The British journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: associations between CSF biomarkers, clinical symptoms, and outcome after shunt surgery.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2025Article
- Analyzing the relationship between specific brain structural changes and the diffusion tensor image analysis along the perivascular space index in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Intravoxel incoherent motion magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of brain microstructure and perfusion in idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus.Neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Clinical improvements in temporospatial gait variables after a spinal tap test in individuals with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Imaging Markers for Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: An Overview.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Resting-state functional-MRI in iNPH: can default mode and motor networks changes improve patient selection and outcome? Preliminary report.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2023Article
- The effect of shunt surgery on corticospinal excitability in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2022Article
- Callosal Angle Sub-Score of the Radscale in Patients with Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus Is Associated with Positive Tap Test Response.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- The Current State of Clinical Trials Studying Hydrocephalus: An Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov.Cureus · 2020Article
- Current Update on Treatment Strategies for Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus.Current treatment options in neurology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) is a treatable cause of gait disturbance, cognitive impairment, and urinary incontinence. This clinical triad of symptoms occurs in association with ventriculomegaly and normal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure. Although the treatment outcomes after CSF shunting for INPH have improved significantly since its first description in 1965, shortcomings in our understanding still remain. Not all INPH patients exhibit clinical improvement after shunting, and it is challenging to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from shunting.
methodsThe Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and PubMed databases were searched for English-language publications between 1965 and October 2015. Reference lists of publications were also manually searched for additional publications.
resultsThe findings of this review indicate that, despite efforts to improve patient selection, the degree of clinical improvement after shunting continues to demonstrate significant variability both within and between studies. These discrepancies in treatment outcomes are the result of controversies in 3 distinct but interrelated domains: the underlying pathophysiology of INPH, the diagnosis of INPH, and the identification of likely shunt-responders.
conclusionsThis review focuses on these 3 areas and their relation to surgical treatment outcomes. Despite the limitations of published outcome studies and limitations in our understanding of INPH pathophysiology, shunting is a safe and effective means of achieving meaningful clinical improvement in most patients with INPH.
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.