ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2019
Background Risk Factors Associated with Shunt Intervention for Possible Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A Nationwide Hospital-Based Survey in Japan.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2019. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for unfavourable outcomes after shunt surgery in patients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Diffusion Tensor Image Analysis ALong the Perivascular Space (DTI-ALPS): Revisiting the Meaning and Significance of the Method.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2024Review
- Patients of idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus have small dural sac in cervical and upper thoracic levels: A supposed causal association.Surgical neurology international · 2023Article
- Differentiating comorbidities and predicting prognosis in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus using cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers: a review.Croatian medical journal · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) are typically older adults with multiple comorbidities that are associated with a reduction in the efficacy of iNPH treatment via cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) shunt placement.
objectiveThe present study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of CSF shunt for iNPH using data from a nationwide epidemiological survey in Japan.
methodsWe examined 1,423 patients (581 women) aged ≥60 years (median age [25%-75%]: 77 [73-80] years) who were diagnosed with iNPH following a hospital visit in 2012. Patients who experienced an improvement of at least one modified Rankin Scale (mRS) grade after the CSF shunt were classified as "improvement" while the remaining patients were classified as "non-improvement." The efficacy of the shunt intervention (n = 842) was analyzed using a binomial logistic regression analysis.
resultsAn analysis of risk factors associated with shunt placement in patients with mRS grade 2 revealed an association between comorbid chronic ischemic lesions (odds ratio [OR], 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-4.67; p = 0.025) and cervical spondylosis (OR, 3.62; 95% CI, 1.15-11.34; p = 0.027). Patients with mRS grade 3 at study entry had an association with comorbid Alzheimer's disease (OR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.44-6.31; p = 0.003).
conclusionsThe results presented here showed that any age-related risk is minimal and should not be cause for rejection of surgical treatment options. Clinical decisions regarding CSF shunt should be individualized to each patient, with adequate consideration of the relative risks and benefits, including maximizing a healthy life expectancy.
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.