ArticleNeural regeneration research2019
Application of neuroendoscopic surgical techniques in the assessment and treatment of cerebral ventricular infection.
Article in Neural regeneration research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ventricular lavage versus conservative treatment in cerebral ventriculitis outcomes: a systematic review.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2025Review
- Robot-assisted stereotactic minimally invasive aspiration and irrigation (RASMIAI): a novel approach for severe intraventricular hemorrhage.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Clinical effect of radical debris evacuation with a flexible neuroendoscope on patients with ventriculitis: a case series.Journal of medical case reports · 2025Article
- A retrospective study on the efficacy of neuro-endoscopic lavage compared to conventional antibiotic treatment in pyogenic ventriculitis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Article
- Endoscopic surgery for intraventricular hemorrhage: A comparative study and single center surgical experience.World journal of clinical cases · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cerebral ventricular infection (CVI) is one of the most dangerous complications in neurosurgery because of its high mortality and disability rates. Few studies have examined the application of neuroendoscopic surgical techniques (NESTs) to assess and treat CVI. This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted using clinical data of 32 patients with CVI who were assessed and treated by NESTs in China. The patients included 20 men and 12 women with a mean age of 42.97 years. NESTs were used to obliterate intraventricular debris and pus, fenestrate or incise the intraventricular compartment and reconstruct cerebrospinal fluid circulation, and remove artificial material. Intraventricular irrigation with antibiotic saline was applied after neuroendoscopic surgery (NES). Secondary hydrocephalus was treated by endoscopic third ventriculostomy or a ventriculoperitoneal shunt. Neuroendoscopic findings of CVI were used to classify patients into Grade I (n = 3), Grade II (n = 13), Grade III (n = 10), and Grade IV (n = 6) CVI. The three patients with grade I CVI underwent one NES, the 23 patients with grade II/III CVI underwent two NESs, and patients with grade IV CVI underwent two (n = 3) or three (n = 3) NESs. The imaging features and grades of neuroendoscopy results were positively related to the number of neurosurgical endoscopic procedures. Two patients died of multiple organ failure and the other 30 patients fully recovered. Among the 26 patients with secondary hydrocephalus, 18 received ventriculoperitoneal shunt and 8 underwent endoscopic third ventriculostomy. There were no recurrences of CVI during the 6- to 76-month follow-up after NES. Application of NESTs is an innovative method to assess and treat CVI, and its neuroendoscopic classification provides an objective, comprehensive assessment of CVI. The study trial was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, China.
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.